Skip to main content

Full text of "Sketch of the evolution of our native fruits"

See other formats


This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on Hbrary shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http : //books . google . com/| 


Cbc CinivcrsUv of Cbicatjo 

GIFT OF "**. 

Chiqag" Tnatiltntg 

^^> I 







^ ^"^ o 

SKETCH Q^Rl? •>.=•:/ 

THE EVOmiJO^ . .QE:^i()¥» • • 

•••: ::•••.•••• ••• •• • • 


.• 1 • • • 

• ••••• .-. 

• S.I I • • • ' • • -.' • • 

• ,•!• ••••••• • » •••••« 

It would be etuioiu»eemle(te*atf <o wlAiit*oiIp VnualoVT WOnlfl * ' 
have been if the ciTilizatlon from which it, and we onnelves. have 
sprang, bad had its birthplace along the southern shores of our great 
lakes, the northern of the Onlf of Mexico, and the Intervening Mis- 
sissippi, Instead of the Levant, Mesopotamia and the Nile, and our 
old world had been open to us as a new world lest than fonr 
hundred years ago.— J.«a OroV' 

• • * 


* t 

. .^.^, BY 




AU riithU rea€rv€d 

• • • • • • 

• • • • • 

• • 

• • 

• •• • ••• -• 

# m 

• • 

• • 

• • 

: : • 

:': : 

••• ••• • 


• i 

. • ,•. 

• • • 
• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • • . 

• i 

,.: : 

• •• • 

• • 

• • 

• ••• 

• • • 

••• •.•••.%• 

• i 

• i 

I : ••• 

• « 


• • • • 

• ■• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 



• • * 1 

■ • • 


* • 


s » 

f • 


« • 

r • • J» •• , 

• ■ • • 

# • 

* • 


► ,••' 


• • • 


• • 


• • 

• • 

• • • 

• • • 


• • 

. •• 

• • • 




• » • 

• • 

• •• 

• -• 

• ••• 

«• • « 

m * 

t • 4 

• • 

• • 

4 ••• 

• • • • •• • • 


* « 

• • • • 

• • • 

• • » • • ^ 

• • • 


» • 

• • • 

w ••• 

• • « 

••• »•• • 


I * • 

• • 1 

Copyright 1898 
By L. H. bailey 

J. Horace McFarUod Company 
Harrlsbunri ?•• 


• UklVk^ 



i ptee this hxnnbte tribute 

f ». >• "... 


Three motives run through this book : An at- 
tempt to expound the progress of evolution in objects 
which are familiar and which have not yet been 
greatly modified by man ; an effort to make a simple 
historical record from unexplored fields ; a desire to 
suggest the treasures of experience and narrative 
which are a part of the development of agriculture, 
and from which the explorer must one day bring ma- 
terial for history and inspiration for story. 

It is now more than ten years since these studies 
were begun. Some of the material has been published 
in bulletins and journals, as indicated at intervals in 
the text ; but the continuity of the effort and the full 
historical retrospect are first apparent in this book. 
The prosecution of the studies has demanded- the con- 
sultation' of original sources of information, when 
such have been accessible, and it has required much 
travel, including a visit to European herbaria in which 
the types of certain species of plants are deposited ; 
and the necessity of these verifications has delayed 
the publication of the work two years after the com- 
pletion of the manuscript. Tet, the book is only a 
sketch. The subject has little continuity or homo- 



geneity of itself, and is not well adapted to mono- 
graphic treatment. Therefore, no attempt is made to 
discuss all the native fruits which promise useful 
results to the cultivator. It is enough if it has been 
shown how the leading types now cultivated have 
come to be ; and in the prosecution of these in- 
quiries, the book is intended as a companion to 
"The Sur\'ival of the Unlike." 

Naturalists and experimenters have long been im- 
pressed with the prospective importance of the great 
number of North American plants which afford edible 
parts or products. There is much literature on the 
subject ; yet this writing is so fragmentary and scat- 
tered that the present importance of our native fruits, 
both as subjects of historical inquiry and as elements 
in our national wealth, is not appreciated by European 
writers. In support of this statement, I have only to 
quote these sentences from DeCandolle's "Origin of 
Cultivated Plants" (page 448): "A noteworthy fact is 
the absence in some countries of indigenous cultivated 
plants. For instance, we have none from the arctic 
or antarctic regions, where, it is true, the floras 
consist of but few species. The United States, in 
spite of their vast territory, which will soon support 
hundreds of millions of inhabitants, only yields, as 
nutritious plants worth cultivating, the Jerusalem arti- 
choke and the gourds. Zizania aquatica^ which the 
natives gathered wild, is a grass too inferior to our 


cereals and to rice to make it worth the trouble of 
planting it. They had a few bulbs and edible berries, 
but they have not tried to cultivate them, having early 
received the maize, which was worth far more." And 
yet the American grapes have given rise to eight 
hundred domestic varieties, the American plums to 
more than two hundred, the raspberries to three 
hundred, and various other native fruits have a 
large cultivated progeny ! Even Darwin's prophecy 
was largely fulfilled when he wrote it ("Variation of 
Animals and Plants," i., 329): "Had North America 
been civilized for as long a period, and as thickly 
peopled, as Asia or Europe, it is probable that 
the native vines, walnuts, mulberries, crabs and 
plums would have given rise, after a long course 
of cultivation, to a multitude of varieties, some 
extremely different from their parent -stocks ; and 
escaped seedlings would have caused in the New, 
as in the Old World, much perplexity with respect 
to their specific distinctness and parentage." 

The author must say, however, that his greatest 
satisfaction in the book is in the record of the men 
rather than in that of the fruits. Professed historical 
inquiry often confines itself within arbitrary bounds, 
not covering the whole sweep of human progress. 
The names which are generally known are those of 
persons who are distinguished in military operations, 
politics, general science, or literature ; but persona. 


who have expended equal talent and effort in other 
and more restricted fields of activity may have 
wrought as much permanent good to mankind. 
The agricultural and industrial status of an epoch 
may be of greater importance to the progress of 
a people than the political complexion is. It is 
a question if the habit of dwelling upon a few 
very prominent names in a few fields of human 
endeavor does not tend to obscure the really 
fundamental movements and to distort historical 
perspectives. At all events, the writer is glad of the 
opportunity to give what prominence he may to 
persons who have rendered a service to the national 
welfare in fields which are little appreciated. 


MXTHICH. GiRMANT, April 15, 1898. 




The Rise of the Amebican Grape 1-126 

North America is a natural vineland 2 

Early attempts to cultivate the European grape .... 9 

The first experiment of the Dufours 21 

The second experiment of the Dufours 33 

The branch of promise 42 

John Adlum and the Catawba 50 

The rise of commercial viticulture 61 

Why did the early vine experiments fail? 88 

Synopsis of the American species of grapes 98 

American grape literature 117 


The Strange Bistort of the Mulberries 127-169 

Summary sketch of the early silk industry 127 

The ^multicaulis craze" 141 

An account of the mulberries 158 


The Evolution of American Plums and Cherries . . . 170-248 

The native plums in general 173 

The Americana group of plums 181 

The Chickasaw group 191 

The Hortulana group 194 

The Marianna group 208 

The Beach plum group 214 

The Pacific coast plum 215 


• ■ 



Various other types of plams 218 

The native cherries 226 

The dwarf cherry group 233 

Retrospect 247 


The Native Apples 249-273 

The indigenous species 250 

Amelioration has begun 261 


The Origin of American Raspberry -growing 274-297 

Early American history 275 

The present types of cultivated raspberries 286 

Outlying types 297 


Evolution op Blackberry and Dewberry Culture . . 298-385 

The high -bush blackberry and its kin 305 

The dewberries 330 

Remaining types of blackberry -like plants 357 

The botanical names of the blackberries and dew- 366 



Various Types op Berry- like Fruits 386-432 

The gooseberry 389 

Native currants 399 

The juneberry 404 

The buffalo berry 406 

The elderberry 410 

High-bush cranberry 412 

The cranberry 414 

The strawberry 424 




Various Types op Tree Fruits 433-447 

The persimmon 433 

The castard-apple tribe 441 

The thorn-apples 443 

The nut-fruits . 445 


General Remarks on the Improvement of Our Native 

Fruits 448-461 

What has been done 448 

What probably should be done 456 

INDEX 463 

J • ^ V 

e " ' 

• • • 

• • 

« « 

•I •. 





North America has given the world a new fruit 
in its grapes. The grape of Europe and of history 
has always led a precarious existence when intro- 
duced into our eastern states, and it is now wholly 
supplanted in this region by the ameliorated oflf- 
epring of the native species. This American grape 
is much unlike the European fruit. It is essentially 
a table fruit, whereas the other is a wine fruit. 
European writings treat of the vine, but American 
writings speak of grapes. This difference in names 
records a true unlikeness between the fruits, for a 
fruit which is eaten from the hand leaves the im- 
press of itself upon the mind, but one which is 
crushed and passed into wine leaves only the impress 
of the vine and the vineyard. But the early Amer- 
ican writings also treated of the vine and wine, and 
it was not until the middle of the present century 
that the modern table use of the native grape began 
to be appreciated and understood. It will be inter- 
esting to trace the progress of this curious evolution. 

. .2.. . .THBjEV^ 


North America is a Natural Vineland 

'•**?PhP fli16f"VeC0rd*:itf: lAinerica is also a record of 
fW -'graphs! '•Lteif, *soli of Eric, the old Norse navi- 
gator, touched our northeastern shores in about the 
year 1000. "Farther south and westerly they went," 
says Justin Winsor's narrative, "and going up a 
river came into an expanse of water, where on the 
shores they built huts to lodge in for the winter, 
and sent out exploring parties. In one of these, 
TjTker, a native of a part of Europe where grapes 
grew, found vines hung with their fruit, which in- 
duced Leif to call the country Vineland." The Eng- 
lish colonists found the coasts of what is now New 
England to be profuse in grapes. In 1621, Edward 
Winslow wrote that "here [in New England] are 
grapes, white and red, and very sweet and strong 
also." In 1630, Francis Higginson said that "ex- 
cellent Vines are here up and downe in the Woods. 
Our Govemour hath already planted a Vineyard with 
great hope of encrease." Thomas Morton, in his 
"New English Canaan," an account of New England 
in 1632, wrote as follows: "Vines, of this kind of 
trees, there are that beare grapes of three colours, 
that is to say : white, black and red. The Country 
is so apt to vines, that (but for the fire at the 
spring of the yeare) the vines would so over spreade 
the land, that one should not be able to passe for 
them, the fruit is as bigg of some; as a musket 
bullet, and is excellent in taste." The Massachusetts 
colonists made wine of the native grapes during 
their first summer, but Edward Everett Hale re- 
marks that "the appetite for such wine does not seem 


perilous." Governor's Island, in Boston Harbor, was 
granted to Governor Winthrop in 1632, upon the 
condition that he should plant a vineyard or orchard 
upon it ; and in 1634 the yearly rent was a hogs- 
head of wine. 

England, however, is not a wine -making country. 
The vine is there grown laboriously upon walls and 
under glass, to rescue it from the uncongenial cool- 
ness of the summers. So the New Englanders ap- 
pear not to have given great attention to wine -mak- 
ing, either from the native grape or from plantations 
of introduced vines. Then, the summers are too short 
and the winters too severe to give much encourage- 
ment to the growing of the vine for wine -making 
in New England, and we must look farther south for 
the early evolution of the American grape. 

The Spanish colonists in Florida were attracted 
by the wild grapes. John Hawkins, an English cap- 
tain, visited these settlements in 1565, and said that 
twenty hogsheads of wine had been made in a single 
season, and he speaks of the wild grapes, which 
" taste much like our English grapes." The intrepid 
French adventurers and colonists were everywhere 
attracted by the abundance of grapes, and we find 
accounts of their wine-making far in the interior 
country. In 1769, the French settlers at Easkaskia, 
in southern Illinois, made 110 hogsheads of wine 
from wild grapes. Even as far north as Michigan, 
these voyageurs found the banks of the streams fes- 
tooned with the vines and the purple fruits hanging 
in wild abandon in the rich September sun. Over a 
hundred years ago, a party of these explorers pushed 
up a river in southern Michigan and, noticing the 


grapes, cried out, "Le raisin! Le raisin!" (the gprape, 
the grape), and they called the stream "La riviftre 
au raisin," and it is known as Biver Baisin to this 

In the middle Atlantic region, the native grape 
also attracted .much attention from the colonists and 
travelers. Captain John Smith saw in Virginia, in 
1607-9, as he relates, "Of vines, great abundance in 
many parts, that climbe the toppes of the highest 
trees in some places, but these beare but fewe grapes. 
But by the rivers and Savage habitations where they 
are not overshadowed from the sunne, they are cov- 
ered with fruit, though never pruined nor manured. 
Of those hedge grapes, wee made neere 20 gallons of 
wine, which was neare as good as your French Brit- 
tish wine, but certainely they would prove good were 
they well manured. There is another sort of grape 
neere as great as a Cherry, this they [the Indians] 
call Messaminnes ; they bee fatte, and the iuyce 
thicke : neither doth the tast so well please when 
they are made in wine." 

In 1648, Beauchamp Plantagenet, in his quaint 
account of "New Albion," describes "Uvedale under 
Websneck" (a part of Delaware) as "a valley sixe 
miles long, sheltered by hils from the North-west 
windes: below it is sixe miles a thicket of four sorts 
of excellent great Vines running on Mulberry and Sas- 
safras trees; there are four sorts of Grapes, the first 
is the Thoulouse Muscat, sweet sented, the second 
the great foxe and thick grape, after five moneths 
reaped being boyled and salted, and well fined, it is 
a strong red Xeres; the third a light Claret, the fourth 
a white Grape creeps on the land, maketh a pure 


GOLD colonr white wine: Tenis Pale the French man 
of these four made eight sorts of excellent wine, and 
of the Muscat acute boyled that the second draught 
will fox [intoxicate] a reasonable pate four raoneths 
old: and here may be gathered and made two hundred 
tun in the Vintage Moneth, and re -planted will mend." 
These grapes which Plantagenet saw, were undoubt- 
edly native to the country; for although he uses the 
name Muscat, it must be remembered that this word, 
and such other foreign names as Madeira and Tokay, 
were freely applied to wild varieties which bore a 
general resemblance to European varieties having 
these names. One of the significant parts of this 
account is the use of the verb to fox for "intoxicate." 
The term fox -grape was evidently applied to various 
kinds of native grapes in the early days, although it 
is now restricted to the Vitis Ldbrusca of the Atlan- 
tic slope. Several explanations have been given of 
the origin of the name fox -grape, some supposing 
that it came from a belief that foxes eat the grapes, 
others that the odor of the grape suggests that of 
the fox — an opinion to which Beverley subscribed 
nearly two centuries ago — and still others thinking 
that it was suggested by some resemblance of the 
leaves to a fox's track. William Bartram, writing 
at the beginning of this century, in the Medical Re- 
pository, is pronounced in his convictions: "The 
strong rancid smell of its ripe fruit, very like the 
effluvia arising from the body of the fox," "gave 
rise to the specific name of this vine, and not, as 
many have imagined, from its being the favourite 
food of the animal; for the fox (at least the Amer- 
ican species) seldom eats grapes or other fruit if 


he can get animal food/' I am inclined to suggest, 
however, that the name may have originated from 
the lively foxing or intoxicating qualities of the poor 
wine which was made from the wild grapes.* At 
the present day, we speak of "foxiness" when we wish 
to recall the musk -like flavor of the wild Vitis La- 
hrusca; but this use of the term is of later origin, 
and was suggested by the name of the grape. 

"A Perfect Description of Virginia,'' a narrative 
"sent from Virginia, at the request of a Gentleman 
of worthy note, who desired to know the true State 
of Virginia as it now stands," but published anony- 
mously in 1649, records: "Vines in abundance and 
variety, do grow naturally over all the land, but by 
the birds and beasts, most devouted before they come 
to perfection and ripenesse; but this testifies and de- 
clares. That the Ground, and the Climate is most 
proper, and the Commodity of Wine is not a con- 
temptible Merchandize; but some men of worth and 
estate must give in these things example to the infe- 
riour inhabitants and ordinary sort of men, to shew 
them the gain and Commodity by it, which they will 
not believe but by experience before their faces." 

Robert Beverley, who wrote a "History of Virginia" 
in 1722, gives a very explicit account of the products 
of the country. "Of the natural productions and con- 
veniences of Virginia in its unimprov'd state, before 
the English went thither," he has the following to say 
upon the vine: "Grapes grow there in an incredible 
Plenty, and Variety; some of which are very sweet 

•The following entry in Pepys's Dlnry (vol. i. p. 82; 1650) shows that to fox 
moAnt to get drunk: "He went with me to my office, whither also Mr. Madge 
comes half foxed and played the fool npon the violin that made me weary." 


and pleasant to the taste, others rough and harsh, 
and, perhaps, fitter for Wine or Brandy. I have seen 
great Trees covered with single Vines, and those Vines 
almost hid with the Grapes. Of these wild grapes, 
besides those large ones in the Mountains, mentioned 
by Batt in his Discovery, I have observed four very 
different Kinds, viz. 

^^One of the Sorts grows among the Sandbanks, 
upon the Edges of the low Grounds, and Islands next 
the Bay, and Sea, and also in the Swamps and Breaches 
of the Up -lands. They grow thin in small Bunches, 
and upon very low Vines. These are noble Grapes; 
and tho' they are wild in the Woods, are as large as 
the Dutch Gooseberry. One Species of them is white, 
others purple, blue, and black, but all much alike in 
Flavour, and some long, some round. 

"A second Kind is produced throughout the whole 
country, in the Swamps and Sides of Hills. These 
also grow upon small Vines, and in small Bunches; 
but are themselves the largest Grapes as big as the 
English Bullace, and of a rank Taste when ripe, 
resembling the smell of a Fox, from whence they are 
called Fox -Grapes. Both these Sorts make admirable 
Tarts, being of a fleshly Substance, and perhaps, if 
rightly managed, might make good Raisins. 

"There are two Species more, that are common to 
the whole Country, some of which are black, and 
some blue on the out -side, and some white. They 
grow upon vast large Vines, and bear very plenti- 
fully. The nice Observer might, perhaps, distinguish 
them into several Kinds, because they differ in Col- 
our, Size, and Relish ; but I shall divide them only 
into two ; viz. the early, and the late ripe. The 


early ripe common Grape is much larger, sweeter, 
and better than the other. Of these some are quite 
black, and others blue, and some white or yellow; 
some also ripen three Weeks, or a Month before the 
other. The Distance of their Ripening, is from the 
latter End of August, to the latter End of October. 
The late ripe common Grapes are less than any of 
the other, neither are they so pleasant to the Taste. 
They hang commonly till the latter End of Novem- 
ber, or till Christmas; all that I have seen of these 
are black. Of the former of these two Sorts, the 
French Refugees at the Monacan Town made a sort 
of Claret, tho' they were gathered oflf of the wild 
Vines in the Woods. I was told by a very good 
judge, who tasted it, that it was a pleasant, strong, 
and full bodied Wine. Prom which we may con- 
clude, that if the Wine was but tolerably good, when 
made of the Wild Grape, which is shaded by the 
Woods from the Sun, it would be much better, if 
produced of the same Grape cultivated in a regular 

Jean Pierre Purry speaks of the abundance of 
wild grapes in South Carolina, in his description of 
that province, written in Prench, published in 1731: 
"The woods are full of wild Vines, bearing 5 or 6 
sorts of Grapes naturally ; but for want of Vine- 
dressers, &c. scarce any Wine is drank there but 
what comes from Madera, which are indeed cheap, 
for a bottle of excellent Wine cost last Winter but 
2s, Carolina Money to those who bought it by the 
Hogshead." William Bartram, traveling in north- 
western Plorida in 1776, found the trees and bushes 
"entangled with grape vines (Vitis campestris) of a 


peculiar species ; the bunches (racemes) of fruit were 
very large, as were the grapes that composed them, 
though yet green and not fully grown [the middle 
of July], but when ripe are of various colours, and 
their juice sweet and rich. The Indians gather great 
quantities of them, which they prepare for keeping, 
by first sweating them on hurdles over a gentle fire, 
and afterwards dry them on • their bunches in the 
sun and air, and store them up for provisions : these 
grape vines do not climb into high trees, but creep 
along from one low shrub to another, extending their 
branches to a great distance horizontally round about, 
and it is very pleasing to behold the clusters pendant 
from the vines, almost touching the earth, indeed 
some of them lie upon the ground." 

Early Attempts to Cultivate the European Grape 

It is not necessary to extend this inquiry of the 
early records of the native grapes. Numerous quota- 
tions could be made from the early narrators. It is 
enough to know that these fruits grow wild in the 
greatest profusion in the wooded parts of North 
America from the Great Lakes to the Gulf and from 
oeean to ocean. It is more to our purpose to inquire 
if the European vine (Vitis vinifera) was introduced 
into the country and what the outcome was. 

It was early conceived that wine -making must be 
a profitable business in the New World because of 
the cheapness of the land ; and the opinion was no 
doubt strengthened by the fact of the profusion of 
wild grapes, for these betokened a climate congenial 
to the vine. The first concerted attempt to cultivate 


the European or wine grape in North America seems 
to have been that of the London Company, in 1621 
and 1622. The Company was then under the direc- 
torship of the Earl of Southampton. In a letter 
from the Company to the colonial authorities, dated 
the 12th of August, 1621, and sent by the ship 
Marmaduke, is the following information: "Since 
the conclusion of our- letter we have received from 
his Ma' tie a Petition exhibiting unto him by certain 
ffrenchmen and Walloones Desires to inhabite in Vir- 
ginia : we have considered of these propositions and 
have returned them so fine an answer as wee consider 
they will resolve to go, they wilbe 60 families, con- 
sisting of about 300 persons, you may expect them 
cominge about the next spring. We hope they wilbe 
a great strength to the CoUony." 

In a letter of September 21st, of the same year, 
sent by the ship Warwick, it is recorded that "there 
are two French youths now sent to Capt. Tho. Nuce, 
part of those ten promised him the next Springe." 
This letter also mentions the sending of silk -worm 
eggs and grape vines: "By the Dutie wch about the 
middle of next month is to depart we hope you shall 
receive full sattisfaccon [i. e. the answering of certain 
questions] ; wch Shipp shall bring with her store of 
silke worme seed and abundance of vine plants, for 
both wch we desire not only that generall pperations 
be made, but that timely notice and order be given 
throughout the whole colony, that every pticuler man 
may make prouision for the receiuinge of some quan- 
titie of them both, and that a straight charge be 
giuen for the pserving of vines and mulberry trees, 
wch we understand with others are promiscuously 


defrayed; and because the skill of handling them is 
only deriued from the Frenchmen we canot 'but here 
recomend this to yo' fano' and regard that they may 
be kindly used and cherished." The letter also rep- 
resents that supplies were furnished for the' French- 
men and Dutchmen (the latter having been sent to 
erect saw -mills). The supplies were "diners provis- 
ions of victualls as also a cloth to make them appar- 
rell; for hose and shoes and other such matters we 
desire they may be supplied by the Companies stock 
there, .out of the Magazine wch now comes along in 
the Warwicke large and abundante in all usefull and 
necessarie comodities." 

It is evident from this narrative that the London 
Company desired to introduce the cultivation of the 
vine into Virginia and that it encouraged the immi- 
gration of the French for that purpose. The experi- 
ment seems to have come to naught, however. Bever- 
ley, writing a hundred years later, speaks of the 
attempt as follows: "The Year before the Massacre, 
Anno 1622, which destroyed so many good Projects 
for Virginia; some French Vignerons were sent thither, 
to make an Experiment of their Vines. These People 
were so in Love with the Country, that the Character 
they then gave of it, in their Letters to the Company 
in England, was very much to its Advantage, namely, 
'That it far excelled their own Country of Languedoc: 
The Vines growing in great Abundance and Variety 
all over the Land: That some of the Grapes were 
of that unusual Bigness, that they did not believe 
them to be Grapes, until by opening them, they had 
seen their Kernels: That they had planted the Cut- 
tings of their Vines at Michcelmas, and had Grapes 


from those very Cuttings, the Spring following. Add- 
ing in the Conclusion, that they had not heard of the 
like in any other Country:' Neither was this out of 
the Way, for I have made the same Experiment both 
of their natural Vine, and of the Plants sent thither 
from England" There appears to be some anachro- 
nism here, for there is no record of any Frenchmen 
having arrived, save the two boys, in 1621. They 
were expected to arrive "about the next spring." The 
massacre occurred on the 22nd of March, 1622. It is 
probable that Beverley is in error in attributing the 
termination of the grape experiment to the massacre; 
but it is enough for our purpose to know that noth- 
ing of permanent value came of the enterprise. It is 
said, however, that in 1651, premiums were offered 
for wines of domestic manufacture. In Berkeley's 
time "some Vineyards" had been attempted, "and one 
is brought to perfection, of 750 Gallons a Year. The 
Wine drinks at present greenish, but the Owner doubts 
not of good Wine, in a Year or two more, and takes 
great Delight that Way." 

We have already seen that John Winthrop, Gov- 
ernor of the Massachusetts Bay, started a vineyard in 
one of the islands in Boston Harbor. This island 
came to be early known as "The Govemour's Gar- 
den." The rent fixed for this favored spot by the 
General Court, in 1634, was "a hogshead of the best 
wyne that shall grow there to be paide yearly" after 
the death of Winthrop. The Massachusetts Com- 
pany sent to the colony, in 1629, "vine -planters, 
wheat, rye, barley, oats, a hogshead of each in the 
ear: beans, pease, stones of all sorts of fruits, as 
peaches, plums, filberts, cherries: pear, apple, quince 


kernels;" and the consignment is said to have included 
I>omegranates, currant plants, potatoes, and other 
plants. The experiments with the vines seemed to 
have come to nothing. Apparently the earliest plan- 
tation of vines made on the New England coast, was 
that at the mouth of the Piscataqua, on the bordei*s 
of the present state of Maine. This settlement was 
made in 1623, but in 1630 Ambrose Qibbons, agent 
of Mason and Gorges, settled there for the purpose 
of founding a plantation, according to Slade, ^^to cul- 
tivate the vine, discover mines, carry on the fisheries, 
and trade with the natives." The planted vines failed, 
but "them that grow naturally" were reported to have 
been "very good of divers sorts." Probably every 
important settlement in what is now New England 
made an especial effort to grow the grape. There 
are frequent references to such attempts in the early 
records of the colonies. But all of them sooner or 
later failed, and we shall not, therefore, pursue the 
history further. 

Following the revoking of the Edict of Nantes, in 
1685, by Louis XTV., many Huguenots sought refuge 
in America. They settled chiefly in the Garolinas and 
Georgia, and they brought with them the French love 
for vine -culture and wine. They made many attempts 
at vine -growing, but with no permanent success ; yet 
the efforts kept the subject before the public mind, 
and out of the failures there finally came a type of 
grapes which persists to this day. The attempts were 
repeated until well into the present century, however, 
always with poor or indifferent success. About 1800, 
one Magget is recorded to have obtained a grant of 
money from the legislature of South Carolina for the 


pnrpose of extending the planting of grapes in that 

The tmstees of the colony of Georgia early made 
attempts at the cultivation of the vine in Georgia. 
One of the famous efforts of those days was that of 
Abraham De Lyon, who, under the encouragement of 
the Trustees, procured vines from Portugal and 
planted them in his garden in Savannah. Jones, in 
his "History of Georgia," makes the following quo- 
tation from Colonel William Stephens, "as present- 
ing the only picture of a Georgia colonial vineyard 
which has been handed down to us." 

"Tuesday, December 6th, 1737. After dinner 
walked out to see what Improvement of Vines were 
made by one Mr. Lyon a Portugese Jew, which I had 
heard some talk of ; and indeed nothing had given 
me so much Pleasure since my Arrival as what I 
found here ; though it was yet (if I may say it 
properly), only a Miniature, for he had cultivated 
only for two or three Years past about half a 
Score of them which he received from Portugal for 
an Experiment; and by his Skill and Management 
in pruning &c., they all bore this Year very plen- 
tifully a most beautiful, large Grape as big as a 
Man's Thumb, almost pellucid, and Bunches exceed- 
ing big ; all which was attested by Persons of un- 
questionable Credit (whom I had it from) but the 
Season now would allow me only to see the Vines 
they were gathered from, which were so flourishing 
and strong that I saw one Shoot, of this last Year 
only, which he allowed to grow from the Root of a 
bearing Vine, as big as my Walking- Cane, and run 
over a few Poles laid to receive it, at least twelve 


or fourteen Foot, as near as I conld judge. Prom 
these he has raised more than a Hundred, which he 
has planted all in his little Garden behind his House 
at about four Foot Distance each, in the Manner and 
Form of a Vineyard : They have taken Root and 
are about one Foot and a half high ; the next Year 
he says he does not doubt raising a Thousand more, 
and the Year following at least five Thousand. I 
could not believe (considering the high Situation of 
the Town upon a Pine Barren, and the little Ap- 
pearance of such Productions in these little Spots 
of Ground annexed to the House) but that he had 
found some proper Manure wherewith to improve the 
sandy Soil ; but he assured me it was nothing but 
the natural Soil, without any other Art than his 
Planting and Pruning which he seemed to set some 
Value on from his Experience in being bred among 
the Vineyards in Portugal; and, to convince the World 
that he intends to pursue it from the Encouragement 
of the Soil proving so proper for it, he has at this 
Time hired four Men to clear and prepare as much 
Land as they possibly can upon his forty -five Acre 
Lot, intending to convert every Foot of the whole 
that is fit for it into a Vineyard : though he com- 
plains of his present Inability to be at such an ex- 
pense as to employ Servants for Hire. From hence 
I could not but reflect on the small Progress that 
has been made hitherto in propagating vines in the 
publick Garden where, the Soil being the same, it 
must be owing to the Unskilfulness or Negligence of 
those who had undertaken that Charge." 

But the attempt soon failed. William Bacon 
Stevens, in his "History of Georgia," writes that 


"the wine which was to supply all the plantations, 
and to cultivate i;^hich they had employed a vignerou 
from Portugal, and planted in their gardens the 
choicest cuttings from Madeira, resulted in only a 
few gallons, and was then abandoned." 

One of the most enterprising and intelligent early 
cultivators of the grape in this region was Nicholas 
Herbemont, of Columbia, South Carolina, whose name 
is now given to one of the best wine grapes of the 
South. As late as January'', 1828, he opens a series of 
articles in the Southern Agriculturist, upon the cul- 
tivation of the grape for wine, but among the varie- 
ties which he chooses are derivatives of American spe- 
cies, like Herbemont, Le Noir, Bland's * Madeira, Isa- 
bella, and the like. 

It is said that Paul Richards, of the city of New 
York, entered upon the cultivation of the wine grape 
on a large scale some two hundred and fifty years 
ago, and in 1664, NicoUs, the first English governor 
of New York, granted Richards the privilege of mak- 
ing and selling wine free of impost, and ordered that 
all persons setting vines within the next thirty years 
should pay Richards a tax of five shillings for every 
acre planted. William Penn planted a vineyard near 
Philadelphia in 1683, the year following his coming 
to America. Andrew Dore made an attempt near by 
two years later. Many other attempts to grow the 
European grape were made in various parts of the 
country, but none seem to have been successful. 

Yet the interest in vine-growiug persisted. In 

/ 1769, Edward Antill, of Monmouth, New Jersey, wrote 

the first American treatise upon the vine. It was 

published in the Transactions of the Philosophical 


Society for 1771, and it covers over eighty quarto 
pages. Ant ill seems to have been inspired with a 
patriotic devotion to the welfare of his country, and 
his treatise bears the marks of that broad and pro- 
phetic vision which is so characteristic of the latter 
part of the last century. "Nothing but the love of 
my country and the good of mankind," he writes, 
"could have tempted me to appear and expose myself 
to public view." "When I first undertook a vine- 
yard," he explains, "I can without the least spark of 
vanity say, I did it for the good of my country, and 
from a principle of love to mankind ; I consider that 
too many of the people of America were unhappily 
drawn into great excesses in the use of distilled spirit- 
uous liquors, which ruin their constitutions, and soon 
render them unfit for the service of God and their 
country, as well as for that of their own family and 
friends. Wine, on the contrary, is a more homogene- 
ous liquor, more wholesome, and much better adapted 
to the spirit, and constitution of man; and although 
men will run into excesses in the use of it, yet it 
works itself off better, and does not destroy the natural 
vital heat and animal spirits, in so great a degree and 
in so sudden a manner, as fiery, distilled liquors do; 
for these reasons I went on, and endeavoured to make 
myself master of the subject, and by many experi- 
ments to satisfy myself of the truth of things." It 
was Antilles ambition, then, to grow grapes for wine 
and not for eating. His treatise is founded largely 
upon European practice, and there is only the most 
meager reference to any American experience. He 
still quotes Columella. He says in his introductory 
letter that the industry is "yet new to America, though 



an undertaking as autient at least as the days of 
Noah." There is other evidence that the undertaking 
had received little close attention, for he knows verv 
few natural enemies of the crop, a condition of things 
which could not have existed if the vine had been an 
important subject of cultivation. The first enemy to 
the vineyard is "people of every age and sex," espe- 
cially the "rude and unthinking sort," which "take all 
advantages of your absence or neglect at the time of 
the fruit's beginning to grow ripe, to rob and pilfer." 
These persons "must be carefully guarded against, by 
a good, close, high fence without, and a smart, watch- 
ful dog within, and especially by the vigneron's ap- 
pearing now and then with a gun in his hand, walk- 
ing about his vineyard in an evening." He then men- 
tions birds, some of which "give you a fine song for 
your fruit;" wasps, which pierce the grapes "in sev- 
eral places, with their sharp-pointed bills;" "a short, 
smooth earth worm," or grub, which "often cuts oflf 
the choicest branches" of young vines near the sur- 
face of the ground; and finally, there were "vine fret- 
ters," which are "very small animalcute, or insects," 
which "appear in great numbers, in mere clusters, 
upon the young, tender branches, upon the juice of 
which they feed." Antill devotes much space to the 
making of wine, and the varieties which he recom- 
mends were all of the European stock. Antill is 
mentioned by S. W. Johnson as "a gentleman who 
cultivated the grape with sedulous attention," and he 
made wine and shipped some of it to England. 

Johnson wrote the second popular treatise on the 
vine which has come down to us. It is a "book" 
or chapter, "On the Cultivation of the Vine," com 


prising forty -three pages in the authors * "Rural 
Economy," published at New Brunswick, New 
Jersey, in 1806.* He drew heavily from the ex- 
periences and writings of Antill. He mentions the 
four enemies of grape -growing which are described 
by Antill, and adds remarks upon the mildew and 
hail, and rejoices that such terrible European pests 
as the snail, gribouri, and beche — "which no art 
has yet been found adequate to conquer" — have not 
yet reached America. In his time, the former seat 
of Antill was occupied by Miles Smith, who had 
"a large and handsome vineyard." But the chief 
interest which Johnson's account has to us is the 
eulo&rium which he pronounces upon Peter Legaux, 
a vine-grower at Spring Mills, thirteen miles north- 
west of Philadelphia. Legaux appears to have 
been the most intelligent and public -spirited grape- 
grower which the country had known ; and he was 
the person who introduced — though unknowingly — the 
grape which ushered in the distinctive American 
viticulture. We shall hear more of Legaux in the 
following pages, and we shall pause now onlj- to 
read Johnson's praise of him. Our author speaks 
of his application to "the philanthropic M. Legaux" 
for information on the grape, and then proceeds : 
"The liberality with which M. Legaux gave answers 
to his correspondent, through the medium of the 
public papers, for the benefit of the public ; the 
botanico meterological observations made for fifteen 
years successively, drawn out on purpose to answer 
the questions proposed, and also published for gen- 

*John80u'ii pictures of erape traiiiins nre reproduced in " PruniuK-Book/" pp. 
301, 382. 


eral information-, the extensive usefulness of that 
gentleman in having in 1801 supplied Kentucky 
with fifteen hundred cuttings, Pennsylvania with 
fifteen hundred, and other quantities to vineyards 
established in Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, 
Maryland, Virginia, and the State of Ohio, from 
which numerous branches have since issued, awake 
fresh sentiments of respect for so useful a character. 
Such men merit a token of respect from every state 
in the Union." 

The attempt to grow the Old World wine grapes 
out of doors in eastern America was continued until 
twenty -five or thirty years ago ; in fact, the effort is 
even now made by an occasional amateur. Nicholas 
Longworth — of whom we shall yet have much to 
say — wrote, in 1845, of his endeavors in this direc- 
tion : "I have for thirty years experimented on the 
foreign grape, both for the table and for wine. 
In the acclimation of plants, I do not believe ; for 
the White Sweet Water does not succeed as well 
with me, as it did thirty years since. I obtained 
a large variety of French grapes from Mr. Loubat, 
many years since. They were from the vicinity of 
Paris and Bordeaux. Prom Madeira, I obtained six 
thousand vines of their best wine grapes. Not one 
was found worthy of cultivation in this latitude, 
and were rooted from the vineyards. As a last ex- 
periment, I imported seven thousand vines from the 
mountains of Jura, in the vicinity of Salins, in 
France. * * * But after a trial of five years, all 
have been thrown away. * * * If we intend cul- 
tivating the grape for wine, we must rely on our 
native grapes, and new varieties raised from their 



seeds. If I could get my lease of life renewed for 
twenty or thirty years, I would devote my attention 
to the subject, and I would cross our best native 
varieties with the best table and wine grapes of 

It is unnecessary to rehearse other attempts to \ 
grow the foreign grape in eastern America. All 
efforts eventually resulted in failure. The experiment 
has been tried upon an extended scale by many ex- 
pert men for a period of over two centuries. We 
shall, therefore, consider the history of another line 
of endeavor, leaving the curious reader in ignorance, 
for the time being, of the causes of all these dis- 

The First Experiment of the Dufours 

A great and well -laid attempt was finally made, in 
Kentucky and Indiana, to establish the wine grape in 
America, the results of which were the most far-reach- 
ing of any single experiment. The leader of this 
movement was John James Dufour, a Swiss. When 
a lad, he conceived that America 
offered a field in which to engage 
in wine -making with profit. Later 
in life he was imbued with the 
feeling which was so well expressed 
by An till, and which has been held 
by many another since, that good 
wine will expel the stronger 
liquors. "Then that offspring of fire — distilled 
liquor — so corrosive and acerb as its parent," he 
writes, "which crisps the heart and maketh man mad, 
will be left for the poor inhabitants of frozen coun- 


tries, to whom both grapes and apples have been re- 
fused: and if this my humble performance, should 
contribute to bring such blessings in the country, I 
could rejoice to have quitted my first home to come 
here." Dufour recites the reasons for his coming to 
America in his "Vine Dresser's Guide," which was 
published in 1826: "When I took the resolution to 
come to America, to try the cultivation of the grape 
I was but fourteen; and I came to this determination 
by reading the papers, which were full of the Ameri- 
can Revolutionary War, and contained many letters 
from the officers of the French army aiding the Re- 
publicans, which complained of the scarcity of the 
wine among them, in the midst of the greatest abun- 
dance of everything else; and by inspection of the 
maps, I saw that America was in the parallel of the 
best wine countries in the world — like Spain, South of 
France, Italy and Greece ; I then made the culture of 
the grape, of its natural historj-, and of all that was 
connected with it, my most serious study, to be the 
better able to succeed here. It is that resolution 
which made me a vine dresser, although some may 
think I am not fit for it, being maimed in my left 
arm. It was it, which made me lose several chances 
of getting rich, in my journeying through America, 
because it had so completely absorbed all my other 
thoughts; and it was also that resolution, which made 
me accept a proposal of an association for the culture 
of the grape in Kentucky." 

The Dufour family has particular interest to us, 
for the outcome of this experiment has had a most 
important bearing upon American viticulture. John 
James Dufour, the father of the subject of our sketch. 


lived in the commune of Chatelard, District of Vevay, ^/ 
Canton de Leman (now de Vaud), Switzerland. The 
family was French. By a first marriage he had two 
sons, John James, Jr., and Daniel. By a second mar- 
riage, there were six children, Jeane Marie, Antoi- 
nette, John Francis, Susannah Margaretta, John 
David, and Aim6. John James Dufour, the son, 
married in Switzerland, and had one son, Daniel Vin- 
cent, but the wife never came to America. The pro- 
ject of a great grape commune was talked over and 
perfected in the family circle in Switzerland, and 
finally every son and daughter of the family, the 
grandson, and a few associates, cast their lots in the 
wilderness of the New World to work out a livelihood 
for themselves and a mission for mankind. Without 
further mention of the father and mother in the home 
nest in Switzerland, we will now follow the fortunes 
of John James, the eldest son, and of his associates. 
John James Dufour, Second, the founder of the 
colony, set off for America in March, 1796. He took 
the brig "Sally" for Philadelphia on June 10, and 
landed in the New World August 12. He paid $50, 
beside baggage charges, for his passage. For two or 
three years, Dufour set himself to preparation for his 
future work by visiting all the leading vineyards in 
the country, going as far west as the French settle- 
ments at Kaskaskia. He visited the estate of Jeffer- 
son, at Monticello, in 1799, and found that the vine 
"had been abandoned, or left without any care for 
three or four years before, which proved, evidently, 
that it had not been profitable." There was a vine- 
yard on the estate of Mr. Carroll, at CarroUton, below 
Baltimore, where, in 1796, "they had tried a few sorts 


of the iudigeuous grapes." Near the Susquehanna 
River, "not far from Middletown," was a neglected 
vineyard which had been planted by a German, then 
deceased, but which "had produced some wine." "At 
the Southern Liberties of Philadelphia" Dufour saw a 
vineyard in 1806 "of a large assortment of the best 
species of French grapes." These were two and three 
years planted, and where still healthy. At Easkaskia, 
on the Mississippi, he "found only the spot where that 
vineyard had been planted in a well selected place, on 
the side of a hill to the north-east of the town, under 
a cliflf. No good grapes, however, were found either 
there, or in any of the gardens of the country. A 
thick forest was covering that spot, with a luxuriant 
undergrowth, and of asparagus in the place where 
the Jesuits had planted a bed of that vegetable." 

Dufour had found, in his journey down the Ohio, 
a Frenchman at Marietta "who was making several 
barrels of wine every year, out of grapes that were 
growing wild, and abundantly, on the heads of the 
Islands of the Ohio River, known by the name of 
Sand grapes, because they grow best on the gravels;" 
and some of the wine made from the indigenous 
grapes, when four months old, was "like the wine 
produced in the vicinity of Paris, in France, if not 
better." The French settlers were convinced, how- 
ever, that these grapes were not natives, but that 
they were derived from the old French stock at Fort 
Duquesne, for the French are said to have rooted up 
their vines and thrown them into the river when the 
English took the fort. There seems to have been the 
strongest prejudice against the native grapes, a feel- 
ing which Dufour shared, as we shall presently see. 


But the most interesting vineyard which this inde- 
fatigable explorer found was that at Spring Mill, on 
the Schuylkill, near Philadelphia. This was planted by 
the Frenchman, Peter Legaux — whom M'Mahon calls 
"a gentleman of worth and science" — but about the 
close of the century it was taken up by "a wealthy 
Society formed by subscription," in Philadelphia, and 
incorporated by the legislature of Pennsylvania "for 
tlie promotion of the culture of the vine." The sec- 
retary of this Society was the excellent Bernard 
M'Mahon, author of the "American Gardener's Cal- 
endar," and whom every botanist and nurseryman re- 
calls in the Mahonia barberries. 

Of all the vines which Dufour saw, none suf- 
ficed "to pay for one half of their attendance" save 
the "vines planted in the gardens of New York and 
Philadelphia, and about a dozen of plants in the 
vineyard of Mr. Legaux." And from these few 
plants of Legaux's, under Dufour's care, began the 
most important experiment in American grape culture. 

Dufour was now ready to locate laud and to estab- 
lish the proposed grape colony. He chose a location 
in the Great Bend of the Kentucky River, about 
twenty -five miles from Lexington by the present pikes, 
and thirteen miles from the present village of Nicholas- 
ville. "The Kentucky Vineyard Society" appears to 
have been established under his inspiration. He says 
that it was "an association for the culture of the grape 
in Kentucky, under the same principles of the one 
established at Philadelphia, though not knowing, how- 
ever, which of those societies had been the first." 
This organization "may be with great propriety con- 
sidered as the beginner, the true introducer of the 


cultivation of grape vines into the United States ; 
although it proved to be a ruinous aifair, both to the 
shareholders and their vine dresser — nevertheless mil- 
lions will accrue to the country at large, from the 
school made there." Dufour mentions himself as one 
of the "loosers in that undertaking;" and he says 
that when he "first came to Lexington/' he was solic- 
ited to make "a trial on the cultivation of the grape," 
but "was left with little courage by what I had seen 
done." "They offered to help," and a scheme of 
operation was completed. The planting at Spring 
Mill, near Philadelphia, was made earlier, for Dufour 
"saw that Vineyard in 1796, 1799, and 1806," but the 
association which finally took it in charge seems to 
have been formed in 1798 or 1799. The Kentucky 
association must have been organized in 1798, for in 
January, 1799, Dufour went to Philadelphia and pro- 
cured, for the Kentucky place, 10,000 grape vines and 
some fruit trees. These, including the transportation 
to Pittsburg, cost $461. Spooner, however, states 
in his grape book in 1846, that "in 1793, Peter Legaux, 
a French gentleman, obtained of the legislature of 
Pennsylvania the incorporation of a company for cul- 
tivating the vine," and that "for one year only pros- 
pects were favorable; but divisions and dissentions 
arose, and the stockholders sold out in disgust, and 
the vineyard went to ruin." But Dufour saw the 
vineyard in 1806, and he bought vines there in 1799, 
so that Spooner* s chronologj' is open to doubt. 

The Kentucky association was organized with $10,- 
000 capital. There were 200 shares at $50 each, and 
forty shares were given Dufour as "salary to conduct 
the business, until it would become productive." The 


land was purchased of William Hazelrigg, who pat- 
ented it from the government on or about 1785. 
When the vineyard should come into bearing, Dufour 
was to receive $1,000 a year out of the produce, or 
nothing if there should be no produce. The 160 re- 
maining shares were to be appropriated as follows: 

For 633 acres of land $633 00 

For 5 families of negroes 5,000 00 

For tools, victuals, and other support . . . 1,000 00 

Expenses of getting vine scions 800 00 

Incidental expenses 567 00 


The full number of shares was not taken, and the 
concern set out in the spring of 1799 with five acres 
planted to thirty -five varieties, many or most of 
which were obtained from Legaux. 

The affair being now fully on its feet, the re- 
maining members of the Dufour family were ready 
to join the enterprise. On New Year's Day, 1801, 
the adventurers came together in Switzerland, and 
prepai-ed to take leave of home and country. Seven- 
teen souls set sail in early spring upon a voyage 
which lasted 100 days. They landed in Norfolk in 
May. In this company were the seven remaining 
Dufours, Jean Daniel Mererod (who, either in Europe 
or America, married Antoinette Dufour), Francis 
Louis de Siebenthal, John Francis de Siebenthal and 
Philip Bettens, together with women and children. 
They crossed the Alleghanies to Pittsburg with 
wagons, the women and children who could not 
walk, going as freight, at so much per hundred 
pounds. At Pittsburg, the colonists took boats on 
the Ohio, and set their faces toward that wild and 

1""- rk-rsTLiuj 
"" Tbe Americi 
"""'JM-- on (he en 
■•* «t wiue inakinf 


SO that I did not reach the vineyard until evening, 
where I was very politely received by M. Dufour, who 
directs the undertaking . He invited me to sleep there, 
and pass the following day with him, which I accep- 
ted." "The spot which he has selected and cleared is 
situated on the river Kentucky, twenty miles from 
Lexington. The soil is excellent, and the vines are 
planted on a small hill, with a steep declivity, exposed 
to the south, and the base of which is two hundred 
toises* f rom the river." "But his success is not equal 
to his attention: not more than four or five varieties 
are left, among which are those which he calls by the 
names of Burgundy and Madeira, and the fii*st does 
not thrive well: the fruit always rots before it arrives 
at maturity. When I saw them, the bunches were 
few and stinted, the grapes small, and everything 
appeared as though the vintage of the year 1802 
would not be more abundant than those of the pre- 
ceding years. The Madeira vines, on the contrary, 
seemed to give some hopes: of a hundred and fifty, 
or two hundred plants, about a third were loaded with 
very fine grapes. These vines do not occupy a space 
of more than six acres; they are planted and sup- 
ported by props, as in the environs of Paris. The 
vicinity of the wood attracts a species of bird, which 
is very destructive among them, and the nature of the 
country is a great obstacle to getting freed from them. 
Such was then the situation of this establishment, in 
which the proprietors took but a slight interest, and 
which was likely to meet with another hinderance in 
the division of M. Dufour's family, a part of which 
was on the point of quitting it to settle on the banks 

*A tnise is uboul Of feet- 


of the Ohio. These details are sufficient to give a 
very different idea of the state of the pretended flour- 
ishing vines of Kentucky, from that which may have 
been formed on the pompous accounts of them pub- 
lished some months ago in the public papers." 

The subscribers to the vineyard company soon 
became disheartened and failed to meet their engage- 
ments, the available stock was used in paying for the 
labor which had been employed in the plantation, and 
the further prosecution of the enterprise rested upon 
three brothers Dufour, the other members of the 
colony having sought a new location on the banks of 
the Ohio, in Indiana. Every effort was made to in- 
crease the stock of the Cape and Madeira grapes, the 
only varieties which had escaped the fatal sickness. 
John James Dufour returned to Europe in 1806, and 
left the establishment in the hands of his younger 
brothers. In his absence the second war with Eng- 
land broke out, and he was delayed in returning until 
1816. He found the "vineyard grown up with briars." 
The brothers had become discouraged, chiefly because 
one crop had been destroyed by a frosty spring, and 
"had abandoned the place to an American tenant, 
who supposed we had a bad title to the land." The 
intruder was ejected by due process of law. John 
James had appointed his half-brother, John Francis, 
his attorney on the 15th of January, 1806. The col- 
ony was at this time practically abandoned, although 
all the land did not pass out of the family until at 
least twenty -five years later. Upon returning to 
America, John James Dufour wrote "The American 
Vine Dresser's Guide, being a treatise on the cul- 
tivation of the vine, and the process of wine making. 








^;, /<,- fr../^»/ /// ,,,^ 

- — ,-v- 










- > 



■ V 




p- - 







o > 



J- ' '"' . *'. ■■' 



^ V " 

• .-.> . " 

l^'5." ^ 





















. *^ 






Sf -rv 


K \ 




- •♦ 







^ »• 











dupour's book 31 

Adapted to the soil and climate of the United 
States." Upon the title-page he speaks of himself 
as "formerly of Swisserland, and now an American 
citizen, cultivator of the vine from his childhood, 
and for the last twenty -Ave years occupied in that 
line of business, first in Kentucky, and now on the 
borders of the Ohio, near Vevay, Indiana." The book 
was printed in Cincinnati in 1826, by S. J. Browne. 
The author set out to distribute his book to friends 
in Kentucky, but took sick on the journey, and re- 
turned to the new settlement at Vevay, where he 
died early in 1827. John Francis Dufour resigned 
his office of Associate Judge in 1827, in order that 
he might give his attention to the administration of 
his brother's estate. In 1828, we find John James's 
son, Daniel Vincent, who had come to America when 
he reached his majority, selling seventy -five acres 
of the old vineyard tract to Michael Salter for two 
and a -half dollars an acre. The land was not 
deeded to Salter, however, until April 23rd, 1831, 
when he had paid a note which was given in 
partial settlement for the land. The land upon which 
the vineyard and buildings stood is now the property 
of George McQuery, whose grandfather is said to 
have procured it from the Dufours in 1828. 

The traveler who visits the spot to-day finds an 
open glebe stretching from the Kentucky River to the 
hills (Pig. 3). Upon this lowland he will see a 
clump of bushes and poke -weeds, and a few stones 
(Pig. 4), marking the site of the old log house, 
which perished about 1845 to 1850. Near by is a 
broken and hollow pear tree (Fig. 5), three feet in 
diameter, which tradition says was brought from 


Bnrope by the Dnfoura. This tree, which bears a 

Sammer Bell pear, still gives an annual crop of 

its indifferent frnit. Just beyond is the hillside 

where the plantings were made, and the remnant of 

a stone wall marks one of the boundaries of the 

vineyard. The hillsides are covered with red cedars, 

with now and then a .^^ ^ 

honey locust, and the ^^^^^& iito -^JJ«?S 

open places support a ' 

bountiful crop of mul- ^n 

leins and teasels. The '^f'lB 

slopes are very rocky, 

the outcrop in lower *^«*- siu of ibe hon» .i 

, , , . _ VlneyBrd." IBU. 

levels being Trenton 

limestone, and in the higher conrses the lower and 
middle Hudson sandstones. This hillside, where once 
the vine was planted with prophetic hope, is now a 
sheep pasture ; and only tradition remains to recall 
the struggles and the disappointments of a noble 
band of pioneers whose labor, though fruitless to 
themselves, was fraught with blessings for the years 
to come. 

The Second Experiment of the Dufours 

Although wine had been made in the Kentucky 
vineyard for two or three yeare, it was evident to the 
colonists that the enterprise was doomed to failure. 
A fatal sickness had overtaken the vines. In 1802, 
certain of the colony sought a new location. Going 
down the Kentucky River to its mouth, they ascended 
the Ohio for a few miles, and chose the bottom of the 
rich and gently rising valley of what is now the 

". indifferent 7n,i . "'^^^f ?» «n .n„„., e^^J 

"iere the pl.„ti„e, ^3,™' ?«!">nd i, the hi|,,ia' 

> stone W.1, „„^7' .nd n. «m J "J 

vmeyard. The hiJJ.Mr. ° "" """-diuie, „, a, 

wth now am the"7 ^ "''""'' "'"" ■*! eed.^ 

loney loonst, ,ad the J "" 

open plj»,. '= . Jaa^. . 

bonntift,] erop „, ^J'_ . ^MHT' A 

iema and teaaeb. The '31 

*pes are „er,, ^^ -;,.:gg 

tte ont«Kp i„ ,^^^; 

w„ne:z ;:;t\ """-■-■•■"" 

^/ddle H„da„„ .aJaLt'f °Tr.T "■« '»"" "d 
tie vme „„, ^, «• Jh,a h.llaide, whe« one. 

.i.«p„,e; and oCtS""'" ''"«•. " now^ 

l<aqrfiM^^K „,. ""■"PPrantments of . „!jZ 

''^^^^» "to™ l,b„ y, " • noble 

^"Sit wit), 1,1 ■ onitless to 



pretty little city of Vevay, Indiana. This spot is 
about 45 miles below Cincinnati. The colonists etill 
held the vineyard in Kentucky, and cultivated it hope- 
fully until 1804, and some of the parly did not leave 
turned to the north. 
The settlers not only 
thought that the 
new location was the 
better one for the 
grape, but tradition 
says that they chafed 
under the presence 
of slavery, and de- 
sired to escape it. 

John James Du- 
four petitioned Con- 
gress to pass an act 
authorizing him and 

enter upon lands, 
with an extended 
credit, for the pur- 
pose of introducing 

the culture of the 
vine into the United 
States. Congress 

r.«.=. vi«,™r™^on».«o^.r™vm«..™ r^spoudcd, and On 

May 1st, 1802, 
authorized them to select four sections of land on a 
credit of twelve years. The settlers selected 2,500 
acres, and called the place New Switzerland. The 
country was a dense wilderness. There were very 
few settlers in the region. The first settler within 



the limits of the present eoanty of Switzerland was 
Heathcoat Picket, who established himself there in 
1795. The objects of the grant, as stated in the act, 
were "to plant the vine and make their principal busi- 
ness its cultivation." The parties to the covenant 
were John James Dufour, Daniel Dufour, John Francis 
Dufour, David Dufour, Aim6 Dufour, Daniel Vincent 
Dufour (son of John 
James), Jeane Marie 
Dufour, Antoinette 
Dufour, Susannah 
Margarita Dufour, 
Francis Louis de 
Siebeothal, John 

Francis de Sieben- 
thai, Jean Daniel 
Mererod, aud Philip 
Bettens. The lands 
at New Switzerland 
were divided into 
thirteen lots, to ac- 
commodate the dif- 
ferent members of the 
colony. The method 
of division was as 
follows: "The said 
lands being on the 
Ohio River, and be- 
ing surveyed diag- 
onally with the River, it is agreed that each lot 
shall meet the River and its breadth upon the 
River shall be as follows: The most western or 
No. 1, 67 poles ; No, 2, 65 poles ; No. 3, 63 poles, 


and so on". This decreasing width offset the increas- 
ing lengths towards the east. The 2,500 acres were 
in this manner divided into thirteen equal portions of 
a trifle over 192 acres each. The first lot, on the 
west, fell to Francis Louis de Siebenthal, No. 2 to 
Philip Bettens, No. 3 to Jean Daniel Mererod, and 
No. 4 to John Francis de Siebenthal. The remain- 
ing nine were allotted to the Dufoura. 

It was provided that "in order to indemnify the 
family of the Dufours of the cost and trouble they 
have been at (at least John James Dufour) by travel- 
ing in the United States to choose a convenient place 
of settlement, and presenting a petition to Congress, 
it shall be given him or family the sum of $100 for 
each lot, to be paid before the 1st of January, 1812, 
diminishing six per cent unto the day of payment, 
upon the sum that shall have been paid before that 
time. As security of the said covenant each of us 
engages the whole of his property, present and here- 
after, and in witness put his name and seal this 20th 
of January, 1803, at First Vineyard [Kentucky]." 

Tt appears to have been in 1803 that the first 
settlement was made by the colony at New Switzer- 

land. John Francis Dufour is looked upon as the 
real founder and leader of this colony, although he 
did not remove there until 1809. He was a man of 
great enterprise and ability, and he left an indelible 
impress upon the people and institutions of Vevay, as 


the colony of New Switzerland was afterwards and is 
at present called. He died June 6, 1850. 

In this new location, the vines and fruit trees were 
planted on the bottom lands which slope gradually up 
from the Ohio. The labor of clearing the land and 
the haste for results were so great that the land was 
not plowed previous to the setting of the vines. "The 
Swissers on the borders of the Ohio," wrote John 
James Dufour, "having the ground to clear from a 
heavy forest of extraordinary big poplar [tulip -tree] 
and beech trees, and depending only on their own 
labor, did not prepare their ground according to the 
aforesaid rules, but satisfied themselves, by digging a 
hole for each vine the same as for any other tree, 
about twelve or fifteen inches in diameter, with the 
same depth, and it being filled with the top earth, 
they stuck the scion in the middle of it." "The first 
vineyard planted on the borders of the Ohio, was dis- 
tanced six feet by two and a half feet, it has been 
worn out in sixteen years ; on the spot, there is now 
[1826] young vines growing, since three years." The 
first wine at Vevay was made in 1806 or 1807. The 
vintage in 1808 was 800 gallons, and in 1809 about 
1,200 gallons. 

One of the best cultivators in the little colony was 
Jean Daniel Mererod (Fig. 7), whose wife was An- 
toinette Dufour. It was probably Mererod who made 
the first wine at the new settlement. His place may 
still be seen (Fig. 8), with the old wine cellar and 
the ponderous wine -press; and a few rods in front 
of it rolls the mighty torrent of the Ohio. At one 
place a grape stock persists, which, although cut off 
and abused year after year, still throws out its shoots 


in memory of other days. lu the year 1895, the 
writer partook of its fniit, which was clearly that 
of the Catawba ; and so the vine conld not have 
been one of the original plantation, as tradition as- 
serts it to be. Aime, son of the Mererods, a hale and 
reminiscent man of eighty years, is now (1895) the 
sole survivor of the grape-growine era of the col- 
ony. He lives at Vevay, where he is the oracle of 
local history. 

Nearly a mile in the rear of the main thoroughfare 
which follows the river, and part way up the sharp 
declivity of the skirting bluff, the house of John 

Fl*. 8. Sllg of one ot the aHdnal <lD*r*i4e (Jcsa Diid1«I Utnrad). 

Francis Dnfonr still stands, in good repair (Fig. 9). 
The original honse, which he built iu 1809, was made 
of logs, and has perished, but the present structure 
was built in the very early days. A grandson of 
John Francis Dufour, and himself a gray- haired 
man, is now a prominent figure in Vevay. 



Grape -growing, as a business, has loug since per- 
ished at Vevay. The vines took sick and would not 
bear; or if they bore, the fruit rotted before it was 
ready for the harvest. Only one variety, known as 
the Cape grape, gave any important return. On the 

Veny ludlftuk 

27th of Maj 1832 or 1833 a killing frost ruined most 
of the remaining vinejards and the Catawba which 
was jnstly becoming famous was set in the place of 
the old varieties But even this took the disease and 
grape growing there soon entered into a decline from 
which it has never recovered. 


John James Dufonr's wife died, in Switzedand, 
in 1823. The half of her estate, which, by the laws 
of that country, fell to her son, David Vincent, was 
transferred to the father in exchange for the latter's 
property, which consisted of personal property, a 
town lot, 29 acres in one parcel and 605 acres in 
another in Vevay and neighborhood, and a half right, 
in partnership with John Francis Dnfonr, of keeping 
a ferry across the Ohio River. It is evident that 
John James Dnfonr intended to return to Switzerland 
to pass his declining years, but he was overtaken 
before the purpose was accomplished, and his tomb 
was made in Indiana. The remains wei*e first in- 
terred at Florence, Indiana, but were later removed 
to the family farm lot seven miles above Vevay ; 
and here the wanderer may to this day read the in- 
scription on the tombstone: 

Is deposited the remains of John James Dufour, 
A native of the Canton of Yand, Switzerland, 
"Who departed this life 
February 9th, 1827, 
Aged 64 years. 
Remember man as you pass by 
That as yon are now so once was I; 
But as I am soon you must be; 
Prepare for death and follow me. 

Dufour must have been possessed of unusucd intel- 
ligence, forethought and perseverance. He was a 
pioneer, and he gave his life to prove that the wine 
grape cannot be grown in eastern North America. 
Out of the ruin of his hopes there had sprung, even 
before his death, the branch of promise, but he had 
not fully perceived its worth. It needed another cast 


of mind, one born outside European environments 
and the traditions of the wine- press, to discern the 
fact that America was destined to give to the world a 
new type of grape. 

The Branch of Promise 

We have seen that both in Kentucky and Indiana 
one or two varieties of grapes had escaped the sickness, 
and had given fairly good returns. The varieties 
which are mentioned as successful are the Burgundy, 
Madeira and Cape. We have no knowledge of what 
these Burgundy and Madeira grapes were, but they 
were probably not of European origin. It is prob- 
able that they were offshoots of some native grape 
which had somewhere been impressed into cultivation. 
They seem to have attracted little attention, how- 
ever, and were soon lost, so that their history need 
not be pursued farther. 

But the Cape grape persisted, and eventually 
became the leading grape at Vevay. Aim6 Mererod 
remembers it, and still wonders what its origin may 
have been. It has turned out that this grape was the 
beginning of successful American grape culture, and 
we must inquire into its history. Dufour obtained the 
variety from Legaux, at Philadelphia. Legaux "certi- 
fied having received them from the Cape of Good 
Hope," as Dufour says, and Dufour and his compan- 
ions called it the Cape grape. In M'Mahon's account, 
in 1806, of some of the vines "under trial at the 
Spring Hill Vineyard," however, there is no variety 
which answers to this. It is evident that Legaux's 
company placed little estimation upon this grape; and 


when the imported varieties failed, the project was 
apparently abandoned. 

This Cape grape appears to have been really an 
offshoot of the wild fox -grape, or Vitis Ldbrxisca, 
and it is, therefore, the forerunner of the varieties 
which we now cultivate everywhere in our vineyards. 
It was also known as the Schuylkill Muscadel and 
Clifton's Constantia. These names are kept distinct 
by Adlum, the earliest writer upon the native grape, 
who declared that it was the Constantia which was 
grown by Mr. Legaux, and which was "foisted on the 
public as the Cape of Good Hope grape." The Con- 
stantia came up in William Clifton's garden, in Phil- 
adelphia, "by chance, * * * as it never was 
planted or sown by him, or any of his family." The 
Muscadel type "was found growing near Schuylkill 
River, by a Mr. Alexander, the gardener to one of the 
Mr. Penns, while Governor of Pennsylvania, before 
the American Revolution." Johnson, in 1806, fol- 
lowing the opinions of Legaux, speaks of the Con- 
stantia as coming from the Cape of Good Hope, 
and of the Alexander as a grape "found in many 
parts of the middle states, and most probably in the 
northern if not in the southern." Whether the 
Alexander and Constantia were really identical, as 
modern writers affirm, will probably never be known; 
but I strongly suspect that they represent two natu- 
ral but very similar varieties. The Cape grape is 
now known in the books under the name of Alex- 

*It 13 straiiKe, however, that a specimen in the herbariam of the Phila. 
Acad. Nat. Bci. labeled '^Trasker's or Alexander grape," and said to have 
been collected by Nattall, is Vitis cinerea/ but the labels mast have been 
shifted in the progress of time. 


It had been declared in Dufour's time that the 
Cape grape was really an offshoot of the wild grape 
of the Atlantic slope, but Dufour was so strongly 
prejudiced against the native grapes that he would 
never admit such an origin, although he was ready 
to admit the good qualities of the variety. "The Cape 
grape," he says, "has been slandered and cryed down 
to a mere wild grape. It is true, that it is a very 
coarse grape, unfit for table use, for those who have 
eaten the best sort in Europe, or who can get a 
better one. It has a very thick skin and pulp, but 
the juice is very sweet when perfectly ripe and has 
the taste of the strawberry, which gives a fine per- 
fume to the wine; such as made the President Jeffer- 
son say, that there was no other such tasted wine 
within his knowledge in the world." This "fine per- 
fume," which in Dufour's judgment disproved any 
plebeian American origin, is the very "foxiness" which 
all modern grape -growers associate with the native 
grapes, and which they are seeking to breed out of 

But while Dufour was determined to "try to save 
the character of our Cape grapes from being made 
merely wild grapes," he was nevertheless convinced 
that it was "a very precious plant to the United 
States." Dufour had the privilege of appearing 
before Mr. Legaux's association in Philadelphia in 
1806, and of explaining to the "very numerous" mem- 
bers the partial success of the grape projects in the 
West, although it was from the Legaux vineyard itself 
that the westerners had obtained their plants. "I briefly 
answered," he says, "that all the mystery of our suc- 
cess consisted in nursing only the vines that were 

dufour's retrospect 45 

prosperous, no matter how good or how bad their 
fruit was; for I was fully of the opinion, that no 
other existing this side of the Atlantic, would ever 
remunerate for the trouble of attendance; that the 
Cape grape was the only one reared by the Swiss 
settlers; that it was a hardy and thrifty plant, giving 
regular if not large crops of grapes, equal to a 
majority of the French vineyards; according to Chap- 
tal's account — making a good wine inferior but to a 
minority of the European wines, and that it rewarded 
its cultivator if industrious, as well as any other 
American produce." It was of this variety that 
Dufour made what he called his "subsequent and 
prosperous plantation" on the Ohio, and it is presum- 
ably the one with which the religious community of 
the Harmonists, on the lower Wabash, in Indiana, 
also made a successful venture in grape -growing. 

Having had this successful experience upon the 
Ohio, Dufour indulges in a retrospect of what might 
have been the success of the Kentucky vineyard, if 
his associates had not abandoned the enterprise when 
he was in Europe: "Now let us see the difference, 
if we had punctually followed the plan, and began 
first by the collection of $8,000, and the purchase 
of 5 families of negroes, for five thousand dollars, we 
could then have had from 15 to 20 head, big and 
small, I could certainly have procured by our joint 
labor, enough to support us all, after the second year, 
besides planting as many vines as we have done; 
and although the first planting had failed, we would 
surely, in 1809 or 1810, have at least 20 acres of 
bearing vines of the Cape grapes, which, at the 
average of 180 gallons per acre, as that is the pro- 


duct on the Ohio, would give about 15 gallons per 
share, besides paying what was coming to me. The 
wine then fetched $2 per gallon, and the vineyard 
would have been yearly increasing. By this time, 
with only common good luck among the slaves, there 
would be at least thirty able hands of both sexes, 
besides a great many youngsters, with whom I could 
tend 100 acres of vineyards, besides raising enough 
for the support of all, at 180 gallons per acre, would 
give 85 gallons per share, worth as many dollars 
besides my reserve ; and the capital stock would be 
worth about tenfold. Those who doubt the afore- 
said calculation, have only to come and see our vine- 
yards and vintage on the Ohio, and calculate for 
themselves." Dufour writes in the tone of the advo- 
cate. He is apologetic for the failures of the exper- 
iments and exultant over the success with the Cape 
grape; but he appears not to have caught the inspira- 
tion that this very Cape grape was the beginning and 
prophecy of a new tj'pe of fruit. 

Wine was made from the Cape grape, although 
the variety was not a wine grape ; that is, it would 
not attract attention in the presence of successfully 
grown European wine grapes. Adlum described it 
in 1823 as "a deep purple approaching to black ; it 
is recommended by some for the table ; it has a 
pulp in it, is a great bearer, and makes a good 
Wine." William Bartram, in 1804, in his account 
of "American Grapes" in the "Medical Repository," 
speaks of the Alexander type as follows : " Before 
they are quite ripe, some think they possess a little 
of the stingy flavour of the fox -grape, but my taste 
never could discover it. It has been supposed to be 


a hybrid between Vitis sylvestris (common bunch 
grape) and Vitis vinifera^ because it was found 
on the rocky hills near the Schuylkill, above the 
upper ferry, in the neighborhood of an old vine- 
yard of European grapes: but I believe it to be 
an American." The variety was never widely dis- 
seminated, and it is unknown to the present gene- 
ration. It had nearly passed out of cultivation by 
1850, and it was probably not planted to any ex- 
tent for ten years before that time. It was driven 
out by the Catawba, which was ^^ almost the only 
variety planted" in the Cincinnati grape region in 
1850, according to Robert Buchanan ; and from 
that time until now there has been a competition 
and succession of varieties, — an indubitable proof 
of progress or evolution. 

It should be said, however, that the Cape grape 
did not pass from cultivation wholly because of lack 
of merit for wine, but partly because the wine was 
too sour unless it was artificiallv sweetened. In 
1845, Nicholas Longworth declared in his pamphlet 
upon "The Cultivation of the Grape," that "the Cape 
is generally free from rot, and bears and ripens well, 
and makes a better wine than Isabella." In speak- 
ing of the settlers at Vevay, he continues: "They 
cultivated the Cape grape only (Schuylkill Musca- 
del), and erred in the method of manufacture from 
that grape. They fermented it on the skin, and 
made from it a hard, rough, red wine, and seldom 
fit for table use, and only calculated to make a fine 
wine sangaree. The same grape, gathered before any 
fermentation has taken place in the fruit, and pressed 
as soon as gathered, with the addition of from 12 to 


16 oz. of Ne'w Orleans sugar to the gallon, and 
after the fermentation is complete, the addition of 
as much brandy as is added to the Madeira wine, 
and proper age given it, makes a wine, in color the 
same as Madeira, and equal to the imported Madeira 
of the second quality. We are abandoning the cul- 
tivation of this grape on the Ohio, for wine. I deem 
it still worthy of cultivation. We have been led to 
the abandonment of it, from the opinion of our 
German Vine dressers and German wine drinkers, 
who are opposed to sugar and brandy in the manu- 
facture of wine." 

Before leaving the Cape grape, let us take a 
survey of the extent of vine -growing in this country 
at the time that this variety began to be supplanted 
by the Catawba. The only statistical account of the 
vineyards of this time is that contained in Rafinesque's 
curious "American Manual of the Grape Vines and 
the Art of Making Wine," published in 1830. Ra- 
finesque's writings are not generally held in high es- 
teem, but there is no occasion to discredit his census of 
American viticultural interests. "A capital mistake," he 
says, "was the attempt to make Madeira wine in Amer- 
ica, instead of American wine." He then proceeds: 

"These and other causes have discouraged the at- 
tempts of a vine company established on purpose in 
Pennsylvania. Mr. Legaux, the manager, by his 
deceptions in grapes, calling them by false names, 
and his bad management, threw discredit on the 
attempt. However, by calling our Bland and Alex- 
ander grapes Madeira and Cape, he was instrumental 
in diffusing them among those who would not have 
noticed nor bought them if known as native vines. 

rapinesque's inventory 49 

"Notwithstanding these difficulties, many patriotic 
individuals have persisted in the endeavor to make 
the United States a wine country, by establishing 
nurseries and vineyards. Such were Major Adlum, 
of Georgetown, and Mr. Dufour, of Vevay, who have 
also both published works on the cultivation of vines. 
Mr. Samuel Maurick, of South Carolina (the first 
exporter of our cotton in 1784), who established a 
large vineyard at Pendleton. Mr. Thomas Echel- 
berger, of York, Penn., who has been instrumental 
in establishing 20 vineyards near York. 

"In 1825 I collected an account of our principal 
vineyards and nurseries of vines. They were then 
only 60 of 1 to 20 acres each, altogether 600 acres. 
While now, in 1830, they amount to 200 of 3 to 40 
acres, or nearly 5,000 acres of vineyards. Thus hav- 
ing increased tenfold within 5 years, at which rate 
they promise to become a permanent and increasing 

"Wishing to preserve the names of the public 
benefactors who had in 1825 established our first 
vineyards, I herewith insert their names. They are 
independent of the vineyards of York, Vevay, and 

"In New York, George Gibbs, Swift, Prince, Lansing, 
Loubat, &c. 

"In Pennsylvania, Carr, James, Potter, J. Webb, Legaux, 
Echelberger, E. Bonsall, Stoys, Lemoine, Rapp. 

"In Delaware, Broome, J. Gibbs, &c. 

"In Maryland, Adlum, W. Bemie, C. Varle, R. Sinclair, W. 
Miles, &c. 

"In Virginia, Lockhart, Zane, R. Weir, Noel, J. Browne, J. 
Duling, &c. 

"In Carolina, Habersham, Noisette, &c. 


"In Georgia, Maurick, James Gardiner, 8. Grimes, Ghecteau, 

"In New Jersey, Cooper, at Camden. Another at Mount H0II7. 
"In Ohio, Gen. Harrison, Longworth, Dufour, &c. 
"In Indiana, Bapp of Harmony, the French of Vincennes. 
"In Alabama, Dr. S. Brown, and at Eagleyille. 

"The average crop of wine with us is 300 gallons 
per acre. At York, where 2,700 vines are put on one 
acre, each vine has often produced a quart of wine, 
and thus 675 gallons per acre, value $675 in 1823, 
besides $200 for 5,000 cuttings. One acre of vineyard 
did then let for $200 or 300, thus value of the acre 
about $5,000! This was in poor soil unfit for wheat, 
and for mere Claret. 

"Now in 1830, that common French Claret often 
sells only at 50 cents the gallon, the income must 
be less. I hope our clarets may, in time, be sold 
for 25 cents the gallon, and table grapes at one 
cent the lb., and even then an acre of vineyard will 
give an income of $75, and be worth $1,000 the acre."* 

John Adlum and the Catawba 

The chief distinction of the Cape grape is the 
fact that it was the variety which first introduced to 
public notice a distinctively American tyi)e of viticul- 
ture. It appears to have had little merit in point of 
quality, notwithstanding Bartram's encomium of it. It 
never attained to a wide planting. The first great 

*The reader can find an excellent account of American wines, with references 
to early writers and experimenters, in Futman's Magazine, iv. 501, 611 (1854). 
An extract from the article is published in Wells' ** Year-Book of Agriculture" for 
1855-6. p. 307- He may also consult an article on native grapes by D. M. Balch in 
Proc. Essex. Inst. iv(186l). 


American grape was the Ca- 
tawba, and it is still one 
of the fonr leading contem- 
poraneous varieties of the 
fox - grape type, the others 
being Concord, Delaware, 
and Niagara. This superb 
grape, which leads all suc- 
cessful northern varieties in 
its wine-making qualities, 
was brought to the atten- 
tion of fruit-growers by 
John Adlum, of the District 
of Columbia, one of the most 
ingenuous benefactors of our 
agriculture. {See frontis- 

Adlum merits our atten- 
tion in three respects, — for 
his perception of the general 
fact that American grape- 
culture must be built upon 
the improvement of our 
native species ; for his at- 
tempt to establish au experi- 
ment station; and for the in- 
troduction of the Catawba 
grape. He began his experi- 
ments towards the close of 
last century. He planted a 
vineyard on Rock Creek, in 
the District of Columbia, 
comprising both imported 


and native varieties. He finally discarded the foreign 
kinds. "It is unnecessary," he writes, "to seek for 
more temperate latitudes for the cultivation of the 
vine. The way is to drop most kinds of foreign 
vines at once (except a few for the table), and 
seek for the best kinds of our largest native Grapes, 
and if properly managed there can be no doubt 
but we can make as much Wine, if not more, than 
any part of the world, on the same space of ground, 
as far north as the 43d degree, if not further north, 
and of good quality." In 1823, he published, in 
Washington, the firet indigenous book upon grape 
culture ; and Rafinesque further commemorated him 
by giving the name Adlumia to the beautiful Alle- 
gheny Vine, or Smoke Vine, of our northern woods 
(Fig. 10). A second edition of the book, made 
exotic by the addition of much pretentious foreign 
writing, appeared in 1828. 

The effort of Adlum to establish "an experimental 
farm" is one of the earliest attempts of the kind on 
record in this country, and it should have proper 
credit, now that the experiment station movement is 
so thoroughly established. He despaired that, "from 
the progress of improvement, and the rapid increase 
of population," the native grapes were rapidly dimin- 
ishing, so that they seem to be in danger of extinc- 
tion. "It was to prevent this evil, (as far as I could 
be instrumental in preventing it,) that I wished to 
obtain of the President of the United States, a few 
years ago, a lease of a portion of the public ground 
in the City for the purpose of forming a Vineyard, 
and of cultivating an experimental farm. It was my 
intention, had I been successful, to procure cuttings 


of the different species of the native Vine, to be found 
in the United States, to ascertain their growth, soil 
and produce, and to exhibit to the Nation, a new 
source of wealth, which had been too long neglected. 
My application was, however, rejected, and I have been 
obliged to prosecute the undertaking myself, without 
assistance and without patronage, and this I have 
done to the full extent of my very limited means. A 
desire to be useful to my countrymen, has animated 
all my efforts and given a stimulus to all my exer- 
tions. * * * As I am advancing in years, and 
know not when I may be called hence, I am solicitious 
that the information I have acquired shall not die 
with me." Poor Adlum! It is a pathetic story of a 
man struggling on in advance of his time, supported 
only by the confidence that his labors would some 
day come to a full fruition. Let us twine a wreath 
of the fragile Adlumia, and renew his memory when 
every returning vintage grows purple in the autumn 

Adlum 's third claim to our remembrance, and the 
one of particular importance in the present inquiry, 
is the introduction of the Catawba grape, which marks 
the second epoch in American grape -growing. It 
seems that a Mrs. SchoU, who kept a public house 
at Clarksburg, Montgomery county, Maryland, had 
a grape vine of much renown which Adlum pruned 
in Pebruarj', 1819, "for the sake of the cuttings." 
"A German Priest, who saw Mrs. ScholPs Vine in 
full bearing and when ripe, pronounced them the true 
Tokay, and said he saw the same kind growing in 
Tokay, in Hungary." Prom this circumstance, Adlum 
called the grape the Tokay, and apparently made no 


inquiry, at the time, into its origin. The variety must 
have been somewhat distributed at this time, for 
Adlum says that it was also grown by J. Johnston, 
near Frederiekton, Maryland. Adlum sent cuttings 
of this grape to various persons, one of whom, Nicho- 
las Longworth, of Cincinnati, because of this aid, 
became the third genius of American grape -growing. 

In the first edition of his book, Adlum called this 
grape the Tokay. "Where I got cuttings of this 
Grape," he writes, "they were of a beautiful lilack 
colour, and a delicate taste for the table ; with me 
they are much higher coloured than they were at the 
places I got them from, and have somewhat of a 
musky taste, tolerable for the table. They are very 
great bearers, and make an excellent Wine." In the 
second edition, 1828, he calls it Catawba, and says: 
"This I look upon as one of the best wine grapes 
in the United States ; and I say the very best. It is 
a very tolerable table grape. Those that ripen in the 
sun, are of a deep purple color; where they are 
partially shaded, they are of a lilac color; and where 
they ripen wholly in the shade, and are perfectly ripe, 
they are white, rich, sweet and vinous. When they 
are colored, they have somewhat of a musky taste, re- 
sembling the Frontignac. They are very great and 
certain bearers — and it will produce a greater variety 
of good wines than any other known grape — from 
Tokay and Champaign, down to Sauterne." 

The genesis of the Catawba grape has always 
been a subject of much speculation. The vinous 
quality of the fruit and the amenability of the foliage 
to mildew, suggest hybridity with the European vine, 
although the botanical characters of the variety are 


clearly those of the wild fox-grape, Vitis Lahrusca. The 
Gatawba was found wild in the woods of Buncombe 
County, in extreme western North Carolina, by one 
Murray, who emigrated to that country from Pennsyl- 
vania about 1801, settling on the Kentucky and Warm 
Spring trail. The farm and neighborhood was called 
Murraysville, and it lies ten miles southeast of the 
present Asheville. The grapes were found upon this 
farm in 1802, growing wild in great profusion. An- 
other variety was also found, bearing very long, 
crowded clusters of dark purple grapes, but the fruit 
was not so good as that of the variety whose history 
we are tracing. This better variety had open clusters 
of reddish grapes, — features which the grape -grower 
will recognize as characteristic of the Catawba. When 
the forest was removed, the grapes became larger and 
better. The following year, 1803, there came to Mur- 
raysville commissioners to settle the disputed boun- 
daries of North Carolina and Georgia, and these per- 
sons tasted of the grapes and pronounced them good. 
Quakers from Newberry District, South Carolina, 
passed through the place in 1805 on their way to 
Ohio, and they took some of these grapes with them, 
but nothing is known of any offspring of these fruits 
which may have originated with the emigrants. In 
1807, General Davy, United States Senator, a resi- 
dent of Rocky Mount, on the Catawba River, trans- 
planted some of the vines to his own place ; and 
some time between 1807 and 1816 he took cuttings 
or vines to Washington and distributed them amongst 
friends in Maryland as the Catawba Grape. Mrs. 
SchoU probably obtained her vines of him or of his 
friends, and from her Adlum secured his cuttings. 


As late as 1821, Dr. SolomoQ Beach, of southern 
Ohio, found these grapes still growing wild at Mur- 
raysville. The country abounded in grapes, but Mrs. 
Murray pointed out one vine of great excellence, 
which grew over a small oak tree in sight from the 
door. This particular vine bore profusely a fruit of 
"a reddish color, with a purple, dusky appearance; 
the taste sweet and pleasant, with a peculiar, agree- 
able flavor." This vine is evidently the one from 
which the variety was propagated. The region in 
which this grape was found is on the summit of the 
Black Ridge, in a thinly timbered region with poor 
and loose, gravelly soil. 

The conditions of the finding of the Catawba 
seem to leave no doubt, therefore, that the variety 
is a pure native, uncontaminated by hybridity with 
European varieties. It is, of course, conceivable that 
a bird may have dropped a seed which it got in a 
garden, but the presumption is against it. Dufour 
was so loth to believe that native grapes could have 
merit for the cultivator that he was inclined to explain 
the origin of promising varieties in the wild by sup- 
posing that birds had taken the seeds there. "A 
blackbird or a wood -picker, eating a berry of the 
Sweetwater, in a garden at New York, or one of the 
Gape grapes at Spring-mill, may travel," he writes, 
"hundreds of miles before he sows the seed of it; and 
we may naturally foresee, that the number of wild 
grapes having some similarity to the European sorts, 
must increase gradually." But all the records agree 
in saying that there were several or even many sorts 
of wild grapes growing in the vicinity of Murraysville, 
and a number of them were of good quality. It 

adlum's vineyard 57 

would be violence to suppose that all of them were 
accidental hybrids with European types which were 
unknown to the region ; and there is no more reason 
to suppose that the Catawba, alone, was a hybrid than 
to suppose that all the rest of them had a similar im- 
pure origin. Moreover, we know that the wild Vitis 
Labrusca is capable of producing very many curious 
and wide variations in its fruit. We must conclude, 
therefore, with the great majority of botanists and 
intelligent grape -growers, that the Catawba grape is a 
pure native. A reigning wild form of this fox -grape 
is shown in Fig. 11. 

An anonymous correspondent of the "New England 
Farmer," in March, 1824, — evidently a member of the 
House of Representatives — gives the following account 
of Adlum's vineyard: "A friend and myself, before the 
meeting of the House this morning, rode to the Vineyard 
of Mr. Adlum, at Georgetown, three or four miles from 
this city, for the purpose of obtaining a bundle of slips 
to be forwarded to the N. York Horticultural Society, 
and by them disposed of as may be deemed proper. 
Unfortunately my purpose was defeated to-day by the 
accidental absence of the proprietor. We however had 
the pleasure of surveying Mr. Adlum 's grounds, and of 
observing his mode of cultivating the vine. His vine- 
yard is in a sequestered and lonely situation, surrounded 
by hills and woods, on the banks of Bock Creek, a 
small branch of the Potomack. It is planted on a steep 
declivity, looking to the south, and covering several 
acres. The soil is a light loam, stony and moist, the 
growth about it being chiefly white oak. At the lower 
verge, passes a small brook planted with willows, from 
which a black vine -dresser was very busy in plucking 

adlum's vineyard 59 

twigs, to be used in tying up the tendrils, instead of 
strings, which check the circulation and impede the 
growth. The vine is planted in rows, ranged one above 
another along the slope, so as to catch all the moisture 
that falls, and the better to retain the artificial irriga- 
tion. Between the rows, which are at about twice the 
distance of Indian com, there is sufficient space for 
using the plough, to keep the ground light and free from 
weeds. The soil is also enriched by common bam -yard 

"There are several distinct departments in the 
grounds, set apart for the cultivation of numerous 
varieties of the vine. Mr. Adlura has in all twenty or 
thirty different kinds, among which are the following: 
Hulin's Orwigsburgh grape, Bland's Madeira, Clifton's 
Constantia, Tokay, Schuylkill Muscadel, Worthington 
grape, Carolina purple Muscadine, Red juice, large fox 
grape, Malmsey, purple Prontinac, Royal Muscadine, 
black Hamburgh, black cluster, Syrian, Clapiers, Miller 
Bergundy, and white sweet water. 

"Mrs. Adlum received us with much politeness, and 
treated us with a glass of two kinds of Tokay wine of 
an excellent quality. It is found upon the tables of the 
Secretaries, and other citizens of Washington, not less 
on account of its intrinsic excellence, than from a wish 
to encourage the growth of the vine, and the cause of 
domestic manufactures." 

Major Adlum occupies such a commanding place in 
our horticultural evolution that the reader will be glad 
of a sketch of his personal history. Unfortunately, his 
works have not attracted the attention of biographers 
and historians ; and it is with more than common 
pleasure that I am able, through the aid of his grand- 


daughter, Mrs. J. W. Henry, of Washington, to draw a 
rapid picture of the man. John Adlum was the son of 
Joseph and Catherine Adlum, and was born in York, 
Pennsylvania, April 29, 1759. At the age of 54, he 
married his cousin. Miss Margaret Adlum, daughter of 
John Adlum, of Frederick town, Md. They had two 
children, Margaret C, afterwards Mrs. Cornelius Barber, 
of Washington, D. C, and Anna Maria, afterwards 
Mrs. H. Dent. They lived several years near Havre 
de Grace, when Mr. Adlum moved to Montgomery 
county, Md., where he lived for a few years. His last 
change of residence was to "The Vineyard," two miles 
from Georgetown, D.C., where he died March 1, 1836. 
It was at "The Vineyard" that he first began the culti- 
vation of grapes. He was a soldier in the Revolution, a 
major in the Provisional Array during the administration 
of the elder Adams, and afterwards a brigadier -general 
in the militia of Pennsylvania. It is said of him, that, 
"as a scientific agriculturist, he had few superiors. He 
devoted almost the whole of his life to the acquisition 
and diffusion of useful information." "In early life he 
was a great friend of Dr. Joseph Priestly, of Northum- 
berland, and the knowledge he acquired of chemical 
science from that learned philosopher he applied with 
signal success to various agricultural operations." His 
wife died at the residence of their daughter, Mrs. 
Barber, July 16, 1852, at the age of 86. Major Adlum 
was also a surveyor, and in 1789 he was directed by 
Surveyor General Lukens to survey the reserved tracts 
of land at Presque Isle (Erie), Le Boeuf, etc. The 
same year he was appointed by the government, on 
the recommendation of William Maclay, Benjamin 
Rush, Professor Nicholson, and Colonel Thomas Hart- 


ley, a commissioner for examining the navigation of 
the Susquehanna River, and subsequently, with Ben- 
jamin Rittenhouse, to examine the Schuylkill River. 
On the 27th of June, 1791, he wrote to Governor Mif- 
flin that he was at New Town with Colonel Timothy 
Pickering to meet the Oneida and Onondaga Indians. 
They were on their way to Painted Post, where the 
meeting was to be held. In August of the same year, 
he wrote a long letter from Port Franklin, where he 
met Cornplanter and other chiefs on public business. 
He at one time lived at Muncy, and assisted in making 
an early map of Pennsylvania. On the 14th of April, 
1795, he was appointed by Governor Mifflin one of the 
first associate judges of Lycoming county, and resigned 
February 16, 1798, on account of contemplated change 
of residence. 

Major Adlum has been described as being a tall, stout, 
muscular man, and very active in his movements. He 
had blue eyes, light hair, a florid complexion, and a 
smooth-shaven face. He was very benevolent, and 
loved to aid the needy and unfortunate. The frontis- 
piece portrait is reduced from an oil painting by Peel. 

The Rise of Commercial Viticulture 

Nicholas Longworth, at Cincinnati, received cuttings 
of the Catawba from Adlum in 1825, and thereupon the 
second era of viticulture, west of the AUeghenies, began. 
The first attempt, at Vevay, New Harmony, Vincennes, 
and other places, was beginning to feel insecure. A 
better variety than the Cape grape, and a surer one 
than the European kinds, was wanted. The Catawba 
seemed to answer the demand. Longworth, who had 
come from New Jersey, was the disseminator and pro- 


motor of the new light. He was a man of strong per- 
sonality and great enterprise, and he threw himself fnll 
length into the new grape-growing. He was farmer and 

Fig. 12. Nlchol 

banker, and died possessed of great wealth. His grape- 
growing and wine-making were em inent I j' successful for 
many years. In 18.50, he wrote that the Catawba "will 
be worth millions of dollars to the United States, and I 
doubt not that grapes of equal value are yet to be found. 
* * * If the wild hills of California be as rich in 


grapes as in gold dust, Jerseyman though I am, I shall 
be more gratified to receive a grape cutting than the 
largest lump of gold that region has ever produced." 
In 1841, he sent a few bottles of wine, made in his own 
vineyards, to London "for distribution among the Eng- 
lish horticulturists." This wine was two years old, and 
was made of "the pure juice of an American grape." 
At that time, Mr. Longworth had forty acres in grapes, 
and he cultivated "American grapes only, with one 
exception, and that was sent me as a native." 

This vine-growing spread until, in 1859, Cist declares 
that "the number of acres in vineyard culture within 
twenty miles around Cincinnati, is now estimated at two 
thousand. An average yield for a series of years, is 
supposed to be two hundred gallons to the acre, which 
is about the average for France and Germany." Long- 
worth wrote, in 1849, that "our vineyards may have 
produced 800, and possibly 1,000 gallons on an acre, 
but no vineyard has averaged 300 gallons for ten years." 
The wine was worth, at the press, from one dollar to a 
dollar and twenty -five cents a gallon, and twenty -five 
cents a gallon more when secured at the cellars of the 
vintners. The same authority. Cist, in "Cincinnati in 
1859," speaks of the rise of grape -planting in Tennes- 
see, Georgia, Alabama, and the Carolinas, and says that 
"for the last three or four years past, the sales of 
grape roots and cuttings in Cincinnati, for the South 
and Southwest, have averaged about two hundred 
thousand roots and four hundred thousand cuttings 
annually, and principally of the Catawba grape." 

Longworth is called by E. J. Hooper "the father of 
American grape culture." Robert Buchanan writes, in 
1850, that "to Mr. Longworth, more than to any other 


man in the West, we are most indebted for our knowledge 
in grape culture. Mr. Longworth has, within the last 
twenty -seven years, with unwearied zeal and a liberal 
expenditure of money, in numerous experiments with 
foreign and native grapes, succeeded in enabling himself 
and others to present to the public a sparkling Catawba, 
rivaling the best French Champagne, and a dry wine 
from the same grape, that compares favorably with the 
celebrated Hock wine of the Rhine." 

But Longworth was also an early and ardent advo- 
cate of the cultivation of the strawberry, and wrote 
the first American treatise upon that fruit, before 1850, 
when Cincinnati, in the language of Robert Buchanan, 
had become "famous for her fine sugar-cured hams, 
sparkling Catawba wines, and a cheap and abundant 
strawberry market." Longworth was "the chief dis- 
seminator of that most important fact, the sexual 
character of the strawberry," as Hooper puts it ; by 
which it is meant that he expounded the fact that the 
flowers of some varieties of strawberries lack stamens, 
and that stamen -bearing varieties must be planted 
with them to insure fertilization. This fact had been 
observed long before his time. Dufour, for example, 
had taken note of it. But it remained for Longworth 
to fully expound it to the horticulturist. 

Longworth was bom in Newark, New Jersey, in 
1783 ; he died in Cincinnati, where he had lived for 
about sixty years, in 1863. The Bishop of Cincinnati, 
J. B. Purcell, wrote in 1841 of Mr. Longworth "from 
long and intimate acquaintance " as " one of the wealth- 
iest, most intelligent, and enterprising citizens of Cin- 
cinnati." The editor of the "Horticulturist," upon the 
occasion of Mr. Longworth 's death in 1863, wrote: 


"He did more to, encourage grape culture than any 
other man of his day, and he was the first to make 
for market a good American wine. His vineyards, 
including those of his tenants, were of vast extent. 
When the history of grape culture in the United States 
shall be written, the labors of Nicholas Longworth will 
form an important part of it." 

Under the stimulus of this rapidly enlarging grape 
interest; gardening pursuits became prominent about 
Cincinnati, and there had developed, by 1850, a center 
of horticultural influence which eclipsed, in the charac- 
ter of its men and the variety of its interests, any simi- 
lar community which has ever arisen in the West. A 
notable company of horticultural authors spread this 
influence far and wide. At the head and front of this 
company of writers were Longworth and John A. 
Warder ; and they were closely seconded by Robert 
Buchanan, B. J. Hooper, F. R. Elliott, G. M. Kern, 
Thomas Affleck, Adolph Strauch, Charles Reemelin, 
and Edward Sayers, the last having removed from 
New England after his career as an author was estab- 
lished. With these names should be associated those 
of many enterprising vineyardists, especially Mottier, 
S. Mosher, L. Rehfuss, Werk, Bogen, J. A. Comeau, 
John Williamson, T. H. Yeatman. 

Grape -growing was now — before the middle of the 
century — attracting attention in many parts of the 
country, and other varieties than the Catawba were 
concerned in its spread. While Adlum was giving 
his attention to the Catawba, another grape, supposed 
to be a native of Dorchester, South Carolina, was 
gaining favor in the North. This had been taken 
North probably as early as 1816. It was introduced 



into New York by Mrs. Isabella Gibbs, of Brooklyn, 
from whom it passed to William Robert Prince, and 
for whom he named it the Isabella. This was the 
third great American grape in point of historical im- 
portance, and it is another offshoot of the southern 
type of the wild fox-grape, Vitis Ldbrusca. "It is a 
dark purple fruit, of a large size, oval form, and juicy, 
and equals some of the secondary European grapes," 
wrote Prince in 1830; "and for vigour of growth, and 
an abundant yield, exceeds any other yet cultivated in 
this country, and requires no protection during the 
winter season." It was thought to be a hardier grape 
than the Catawba, and to ripen earlier in the fall, and 
for these reasons it obtained great favor in the north- 
ernmost states, and occasional vines of it may still be 
seen about old establishments. It should be said, 
before leaving the Isabella, that fifty years ago its 
American birth was strongly disputed, and the most 
direct evidence was adduced to show that it is a Span- 
ish grape. Bernard Laspeyre, a noted grape grower 
near Wilmington, North Carolina, states that he dis- 
covered the grape in the garden of another French- 
man at Charleston, South Carolina, and that this man 
had himself brought it from Spain. This history is 
fully set forth in Spooner's ** Cultivation of American 
Grape Vines," in 1846, in the second volume of the 
"Western Horticultural Review," 1852, and in other 
early writings. While the records seem to be ex- 
plicit, the botanical characters of the Isabella are so 
clearly those of the native fox -grape that all writers 
now agree that it is American, or at most only a 
dilute hybrid with the European type. There must 
have been some error in Laspeyre ^s history; or it is 


possible that his grape was really not the Isabella, 
but a closely similar variety. 

Progressive horticulturists were now fully con- 
vinced of the importance of the native grapes. At- 
tempts to grow the European varieties in the open 
air were still made here and there, but there were no 
longer any sustained or concerted efforts to introduce 
them, and everyone began to feel that the hope for 
American grape-culture lies in the amelioration of the 
native species. Various persons made definite attempts 
to secure promising wild forms of grapes. Prince de- 
scribed eighty -one native grapes in his "Treatise on 
the Vine," in 1830. Even Johnson, in 1806, while 
recommending chiefly the European grapes, says that 
"the sorts of vines are too numerous to mention, even 
if confined to the American alone;" but he evidently 
had in mind the wild forms rather more than those 
which had been brought into cultivation. As early as 
1820 or 1821, Mr. Herbemont, of South Carolina, had 
sent out a circular requesting cuttings of native grapes. 
(See page 78.) Longworth made a similar request in 
the Cincinnati Gazette in 1848 or 1849, and twenty - 
four varieties were sent him in the spring of 1849. 
From 1840 on, the annual crops of novel varieties 
have afforded a continuous fund of inspiration to 
those with grape- growing proclivities; but by far the 
greater part of the novelties have fallen by the way, 
and are now forgotten. No doubt, there have been 
two thousand or three thousand varieties, more or less, 
disseminated in the last fifty or sixty years, most of 
which are offspring of our native species. 

About 1830, grapes were planted at Hammonds- 
port, at the southern extremity of Eeuka Lake, in 


western New York, and this proved to be the begin- 
ning of the famous New York vineyard interest, which, 
as practiced about the central lakes, is to this day the 
most important Catawba -growing region in the land. 
About that time. Rev. William Bostwick planted vines 
of Catawba and Isabella, and he raised excellent 
grapes. About 1843, William Hastings planted vines 
of the same varieties in his garden, and was also suc- 
cessful. The first regular vineyard in the region was 
one of about two acres of Catawbas and Isabellas, 
planted in the town of Pulteney in 1853. But as early 
as 1846, grapes were shipped from this Keuka Lake 
region to New York. A shipment of two hundred to 
three hundred pounds, according to George C. Snow, 
shipped on the Erie Canal, broke the New York city 
market. In 1890, the same region shipped, exclusive 
of the amount used for wine, about twenty thousand 
tons of gi'apes. 

Grape -growing began in the lower Hudson River 
Valley about the same time as about Keuka Lake. 
One of the earliest vineyards was planted in 1845, of 
Isabella vines, in Ulster county, by William T. Cornell. 
Another early planter was William Kniffin, a neighbor 
of Cornell, the originator of the now famous Kniffin 
system of training. The evolution of grape training 
has shown the same transformation as that of the 
grapes themselves. The early methods were essentially 
or exactly those used in Europe, but with the gradual 
aggrandizement of the native species, distinctively 
native systems of training arose. The interest in 
grapes was soon widespread, having been disseminated 
from many early small centers from New England and 
New York to Missouri and the Southern states. 


An important grape center early sprung up in 
Oasconade county, eastern Missouri, a locality which 
later became conspicuous because of the labors of 
George Husmann and Jacob Rommel. The former 
settled at Hermann, and the latter at Morrison. The 
first cultivated grape to fruit at Hermann, according 
to Husmann, was an Isabella, which was planted by 
Mr. Pugger, and which bore in 1845. The first wine 
was made in 1846. The Catawba was introduced, and 
first bore in 1848. This variety awakened great in- 
terest, but it soon succumbed to disease, and its place 
was taken by Norton's Virginia, of which we have yet 
to speak (page 78). Husmann early gave his attention 
to writing, and has produced "The Cultivation of the 
Native Grape, and Manufacture of American Wines" 
(1866), which, in its modern and enlarged form (1880), 
is known as "American Grape Growing and Wine 
Making." He also established and edited the "Grape 
Culturist" (1869-1871), which was the first American 
journal to devote itself exclusively to a single type of 
plant. Since Adlum, no writer of books has so clearly 
and forcibly emphasized the importance of the native 
grapes as Husmann. Jacob Rommel gave his atten- 
tion to the breeding of varieties, using a new stock — 
the river-bank grape (Vitis vulpina, or T''. riparia) — 
as the parent of crosses. Some of his results are 
Elvira, Transparent, Faith, Etta, Montefiore, and the 

It is not our purpose to follow this historj*^ further, 
except to note the introduction of a few remaining novel 
types of varieties. 

In 1843, a new grape was exhibited before the Mas- 
sachusetts Horticultural Society, in Boston, by Mrs. 


Diana Crehore, of Milton, Massachusetts. It was a 
seedling of the Catawba, with round pale red or amber 
berries. It was named the Diana, in honor of the origi- 
nator. This grape soon attracted wide attention, and it 
was the precursor of a constantly widening stream of 
ameliorated seedlings of known parentage. The novi- 
tiate stage of our grape culture, — the introduction of 
grapes from the wild, — now came rapidly to a close, and 
the epoch of definite attempt at the breeding of varie- 
ties came on. Some of our native fruits, notably the 
cranberry and dewberry, are yet in this initiate stage, 
in which the new varieties are still such as are picked 
up in wild areas rather than in gardens. 

The next great event in the evolution of American 
grapes was the making of hybrids with the European 
vine. The first authentic hybrid vine was exhibited 
before the Massachusetts Horticultural Society in 1854, 
by John Fisk Allen, author of "A Practical Treatise on 
the Culture and Treatment of the Grape Vine." It was 
a hybrid between the Golden Chasselas and Isabella. 
About this time E. S. Rogers, of Roxbury, Massachu- 
setts, began those remarkable experiments in hybridiza- 
tion which have given us so many excellent varieties. 
Rogers obtained his first fruits in 1856. J. H. Ricketts, 
a bookbinder of Newburgh, New York, George Has- 
kell, lawyer, of Ipswich, Massachusetts, Jacob Rommel 
and Hermann Jaeger, of Missouri, Jacob Moore, of New 
York, and T. V. Munson, of Texas, have greatly extended 
our knowledge of the possibilities of crossing amongst 
the grapes. But the primary hybrids of the American 
and European species have never made a great impres- 
sion upon commercial grape -culture, although many of 
them are much prized for their high quality in the home 


garden. What they gain in quality they are apt to lose 
in amenability to mildew and phylloxera, in lack of 
robustness, or in infertility of the bloom. The sec- 
ondary or attenuated hybrids, however, — those bom of 
hybrids, or of a hybrid with some other variety, — give 
more promise; and of these there are striking examples 
in Jacob Moore's Brighton and Diamond, and in some 
of Munson's recent productions. There is promise of 
much advantage to be gained by the gradual admix- 
ture of dilute blood of foreign grapes into our own 
improved types, but the results are quite as likely to 
come from accidental admixtures as from intending 
ones, for most plant -breeders are looking for bold and 
emphatic results. 

All this is well illustrated in the Delaware, which 
enjoys the distinction of being the only one of the four 
great American grapes which gives any very strong evi- 
dence of foreign blood. This has an obscure history, 
and the parents, whatever they may be, are so nicely 
blended in it that they cannot be positively distinguished. 
It was found in a New Jersey garden about 1850. The 
owner of the garden, Paul H. Provost, had come from 
Switzerland, and had brought grape-vines with him. 
This nondescript vine was at first thought to be an 
Italian grape, then it was thought to be the Red Trami- 
ner of the Old World. Some thought it a seedling from 
one of the European varieties. But at the present time, 
most authorities consider it to be a hybrid, perhaps the 
greater number of them thinking it a cross between some 
fox-grape and the European vine, and others, like Mun- 
son, regarding it as a combination of the fox -grape and 
the southern wine -grape. It is one of those fortuitous 
riddles which nature now and then produces, the genesis 


of which, if known and well considered, might afford 
new light to the intending breeder of plants. 

The next great event in the evolution of the Ameri- 
can grape, — and in respect to its commercial importance, 
the greatest event of all, — was the introduction of a 
meritorious variety of the northern fox -grape type. 
This variety is the Concord. It was introduced early 
in the fifties. The earliest record of it in the Massa- 
chusetts Horticultural Society is in 1853: "E. W. Bull 
exhibited his new seedling grape, which, under the name 
of Concord, is now so generally cultivated throughout 
the country." A year later, "the Concord was shown in 
great perfection" before the same society. The first 
fruit of this grape was obtained in 1849. The exact 
origin of it is obscure. Mr. Bull bought the house at 
Concord, in which he lived until his death, in 1840. 
That year, he relates, boys brought up from the river 
some wild grapes, and scattered them about the place. 
A seedling appeared, evidently the offspring of these 
truant grapes. Mr. Bull tended it, and in 1843 he 
obtained a bunch of grapes from it. He planted seeds 
of this bunch, and a resulting plant fruited in 1849. 
The fruit had such merit that all other seedlings were 
destroyed. The new variety was named the Concord, 
and although its quality is not the highest, and it was at 
first disparaged on this account, it is now the dominant 
grape in all eastern America, and it was the first variety 
of sufficient hardiness, productiveness and immunity 
from diseases to carry the culture of the vine into every 
garden in the land. As an illustration of the extent to 
which a particular variety or a custom may dominate the 
industry of a region, we may cite the influence of the 
Concord upon the people of Chautauqua county. New 


York. The variety was introduced there about 1856, 
by Lincoln Fay, and that region is to this day, with its 
26,000 acres of grapes, controlled by the Concord. In 

the central lake region of New York, however, where 
the grape interest began earlier and before the days of 
the Concord, the Catawba is still the controlling variety, 
and the wine interest is great. 

Ephriam W. Bull, the originator of the Concord, 
died September 27, 1895, in his ninetieth year, loved 


of his neighbors and honored by every countryman who 
grows or eats a grape. It is a pregnant type, and has 
given rise to no less than fifty honorable seedlings, 
which range in color from greenish white to purple- 
black. It is the one most important type of American 
grapes, and the really successful commercial viticulture 
of the country dates from its dissemination ; and yet 
this grape is a pure native fox-gi'ape, and evidently 
only twice removed from the wild vine. If such humble 
parentage is capable of developing such an enormous 
industry, what may we not expect for the future ! 

The Concord, as we have said, has given us a most 
extensive and interesting progeny. Some of its off- 
spring are Worden, Moore Early, Pocklington, Eaton 
and Rockland. Of all the Concord seedlings, the most 
famous is the Worden, which originated at Minetto, 
Oswego county. New York, on the grounds of Schuyler 
Worden, who, although over ninety years of age, still 
takes the liveliest interest in the variety. The old 
vine, about thirty-five years old at this writing (1898), 
is still healthy and productive. The seed from which 
it came was taken from an isolated Concord vine, 
and the plant bore at four years from the seed. The 
variety was named by J. A. Place, a prominent citizen 
of Oswego and an acquaintance of Worden. 

While all these types were developing from the 
fox-grape, Vitis Labriisca (Fig. 11), another native 
grape of the North had given valuable offspring. This 
is the river-bank grape, Vitis vulpina ( Vitis riparia of 
the botanies) (Fig. 15). "In the year 1821," writes 
W. C. Strong, in his "Culture of the Grape," "Hon. 
Hugh White, then in the junior class in Hamilton 
College, New York, planted a seedling vine in the 


pounds of Professor Noyes, on College Hill, which 
still remains, and is the original Clinton, — a very 
hardy, healthy, and productive grape, of the first class. 
Bunches and berries small, black, with blue bloom; 
brisk, juicy, quite acid, but improves by keeping until 
February." The original Clinton vine is still stand- 
ing, at Clinton, where it climbs over a great elm tree. 
Rev. E. P. Powell, of Clinton, writes me that he has 
known the vine for forty years, arid that there can be 
no mistake about the identity of it. He says: "It 
is a seedling out of a handful sowed by advice of 
Professor Noyes, — the greatest genius Hamilton College 
ever had, — and he selected the best; and this was the 
Clinton. Where the seed came from, I do not know." 
At one time, this Clinton grape was widely dissemi- 
nated for general vineyard culture, but it could not 
contend with Concord, Diana, and hosts of other 
rapidly appearing fox -grapes, and its use is now 
almost wholly restricted to wine -making; but it intro- 
duced a new type of grape — although some authorities 
suppose it to be a hybrid between the river -bank and 
fox -grapes — and one which was destined to play a 
most important part, in a new role, in the years to 
come (see page 92). 

We have already seen (page 13) that the French 
colonists of the southeastern Atlantic states early 
made attempts to grow the European vine. These, 
like all similar attempts in eastern America, had failed. 
But out of the ruins there had come, early in the cen- 
tury, several types of grapes of much value, all of 
them possessing great merit for wine. Chief of these 
are Le Noir and Herbemont. The latter is now widely 
grown in the South, and it receives its name from 


Nicholas Herbemont, who was a public spirited grape- 
grower of South Carolina in the early part of the 
century (page 67). This grape had begun to attract 
attention about Cincinnati as early as 1850, and in 
1853 Nicholas Longworth strongly recommended it to 
the members of the Cincinnati Horticultural Society. 
Wine making was still the leading motive in Long- 
worth ^s time, and he was attracted by the Herbe- 
mont largely because of its merits for wine. "The 
singularity of the wine is," he says, "that it has the 
aroma and flavor of the Spanish Manzanilla, but su- 

While the Herbemont was the leading grape in the 
South, and was becoming established as far north as the 
Ohio Valley, another epoch-making grape was coming 
into notice in the middle South. This was the Norton's 
Virginia. It was a wild grape, found by Dr. F. A. 
Lemosq on Cedar Island, in James River, near Rich- 
mond, Virginia, in 1835. It was recommended to public 
favor as a wine grape by Dr. D. N. Norton, an enterpris- 
ing horticulturist living near Richmond, and the variety 
now bears his name. The grape early reached the Cin- 
cinnati grape settlement, but it was first brought dis- 
tinctly to the fore in the pioneer West (page 69). Hus- 
mann, writing in 1865, details its introduction into 
Missouri: "It was about this time [1850] that the 
attention of some of our grape -growers was drawn to- 
wards a small, insignificant looking grape, which had 
been obtained by a Mr. Wiedersprecker from Mr. Hein- 
richs, who had brought it from Cincinnati, and, almost 
at the same time, by Dr. Kehr, who had brought it with 
him from Virginia. The vine seemed a rough customer, 
and its fruit very insignificant when compared with the 


large bunch and berry of the Catawba, but we soon 
observed that it kept its foliage bright and green when 
that of the Catawba became sicklj'^ and dropped; and 
also, that no rot or mildew damaged the fruit, when 
that of the Catawba was nearly destroyed by it. A few 
tried to propagate it by cuttings, but generally failed to 
make it grow. They then resorted to grafting and lay- 
ering, with much better success. After a few years a 
few bottles of wine were made from it, and found to be 
very good. But at this time it almost received its death- 
blow, by a very unfavorable letter from Mr. Longworth, 
who had been asked his opinion of it, and pronounced 
it worthless. Of course, with the majority, the fiat of 
Mr. Longworth, the father of American grape -culture, 
was conclusive evidence, and they abandoned it. Not 
all, however; a few persevered, among them Messrs. 
Jacob Rommel, Poeschel, Langendoerfer, Qrein and my- 
self. We thought Mr. Longworth was human and 
might be mistaken, and trusted as much to the evidence 
of our senses as to his verdict, therefore increased it as 
fast as we could, and the sequel proved that we were 
right. After a few years more, wine was made from it 
in larger quantities, found to be much better than the 
first imperfect samples; and now that despised and con- 
demned grape is the great variety for red wine, equal, if 
not superior to the best Burgundy and Port; a wine of 
which good judges, heavy importers of the best Euro- 
pean wines too, will tell you that it has not its equal 
among all the foreign red wines, which has already 
saved the lives of thousands of suffering children, men, 
and women, and, therefore, one of the greatest blessings 
an all -merciful God has ever bestowed upon suffering 
humanity. This despised grape is now the rage, and 


300,000 of the plants oould have been obtained. Need 
I name it! It is the Norton's Virginia. Truly, * great 
oaks from little acorns growl' and I boldly prophecy 
to-day that the time is not far distant when thousands 
upon thousands of our hillsides will be covered with its 
luxuriant foliage, and its purple juice become one of 
the exports to Europe, provided, always, that we do not 
grow so fond of it as to drink it all. I think that this 
is preeminently a Missouri grape. Here it seems to 
have found the soil in which it flourishes best. I have 
seen it in Ohio, but it does not look there as if it was 
the same grape. And why should itt They drove it 
from them and discarded it in its youth ; we fostered it, 
and do you not think, dear reader, there sometimes is 
gratitude in plants as well as men! Other states may 
plant it and succeed with it, too, to a certain extent, 
but it will cling with the truest devotion to those lo- 
calities where it was cared for in its youth." 

In 1858, Husmann received from William Robert 
Prince, the nurseryman of Flushing, Long Island, 
another grape, the Cynthiana, which is so like the 
Norton's Virginia as to be almost indistinguishable 
from it. "This grape promises fair to become a dan- 
gerous rival to Norton's Virginia," writes Husmann 
in 1865. But the Norton was too firmly established 
to be supplanted by the newcomer, although the two 
varieties are usually mentioned together when one 
speaks of wine -making in the middle South. This 
Cynthiana is understood to have been picked up in the 
wild in Arkansas. 

Now, what are these southern wine -grapes, — Her- 
bemont, Le Noir, Norton's Virginia, Cynthiana, and 
all their kin? To what species do they belongt As 


usual, opinions are divided. Practically all authors 
are agreed that the Norton's Virginia and Cynthiana 
tribe is a direct offshoot of the wild summer -grape 
{Viiis cestivalis, Fig. 16) of the Middle states and the 
South. The Herbemont and Le Noir have been held 
by most writers to have been descended from the same 
wild species, but our contemporaneous student of the 
genus, T. V. Munson, derives them from an unrecog- 
nized and undescribed European species. "The Her- 
bemont as * Brown French,' and Le Noir or Jacques 
as 'Blue French,' he has traced," writes Munson of 
his own studies, "back through the Bourquin family 
of Savannah, Georgia, to their bringing to Georgia 
in its early settlement over 150 years ago from South 
France. ****** j^ honor of Gugie Bour- 
quin, who so well assisted me to trace out the origin, 
in this country, of Herbemont and Le Noir, I named 
the group as a new species, Vitis Bourquhiiana.^^ With 
all the uncertainties and gaps in the records and tra- 
ditions of events pertaining to the cultivation of plants, 
and with the constant intervention of seedlings and 
new varieties, great dependence cannot be placed upon 
the historical genealogy of the grape. The difficulty 
is all the greater because the species of grapes are 
themselves so variable and so like one another, that 
errors can occur in the records almost before one's 
eyes. The student must rely more upon the botanical 
features of the plants than upon the histories of them. 
For myself, while admitting that my facilities for the 
study of the question have been less than those of 
Munson, I am convinced that this Herbemont tribe is 
an ameliorated form of the native summer-grape, Vitis 
(Bsiivalis. Some of the varieties may be hybrids of 

Pia. le. Summer grave. TUii mlicalii. (From Ui 


Vitis (Bstivalis and the European wine -grape. It is 
very likely that some of these varieties, perhaps even 
the Herbemont itself, may have been brought from 
Europe; but if full records had been made of the early 
introductions of American plants into southern Europe 
by the returning of the emigrant ships and by other 
vessels, it is equally likely that we should find that 
our native summer- grape had been sent to the Old 
World. At all events, it is unassumable that a native 
grape, distributed through the Mediterranean region, 
could have escaped for centuries the critical search of 
European botanists and the knowledge of hundreds of 
generations of vignerons, to be discovered at last trans- 
planted in the New World. This southern family of 
wine -grapes is not further removed from Vitis cBsiivalis 
than the Concord and some other common fox -grapes 
are removed from Vitis Ldbriisca; and the botanical 
features of the family seem to me to be distinctly those 
of Vitis (Bstivalis, Mr. Munson has raised plants which 
he considers to belong to his Vitis Bourquiniana from 
seeds which he obtained from Spain; but the speci- 
mens which I have seen of these plants seem to me 
to be only forms of the European wine-grape, Vitis 

Still another native grape must have a conspicuous 
place in this history. It is the Scuppemong, a direct 
offspring of the curious Muscadine grape (Vitis rotun- 
difolia, Fig. 17), of the South. It is said that the 
Scuppernong was discovered on Roanoke Island, North 
Carolina, by Sir Walter Raleigh's colony, and that the 

*The student of this southern type of grapes should consult the writings of 
Engelmann and Munson. The best and most recent presentation of the char- 
acteristics of the group by Manson is to be found in the "Texas Farm and 
Ranch " for February 8, 1806. 



orig:inal vine is still io existeuce. The MuscadtDe type 
o( grape differs from other species iu having a tight, 
non-shredding bark, unforked tendrils, a very long 
growth of vine, very late bloom, and few-fruited clus- 
ters of globular, thick-skinned, musky-tasted fruits. 

It grows wild from Maryland southwards, but it reaches 
its greatest perfection south of Virginia. The fruits 
are purple-black, except in the Scuppemong, which is 
yellowish. This variety bears four to six large grapes 
in a cluster, which fall to the ground as they ripen. 
The Scuppemong has long been highly esteemed in the 
South, for although the quality is far inferior to that of 
the Catawba in the opinion of most persons, it makes 
excellent wine, and it is a regular aud abuudaut bearer; 


and those who become accustomed to it are fond of its 
sweet and perfumed berries. Sidney Weller, of Brink- 
leyville, North Carolina, extolled the Scuppernong to the 
Commissioner of Patents in 1853, as the "grape of 
grapes" for the South. At the State Pair, at Raleigh, 
he had "exhibited Scuppernong grapes .^our inches in 
circumference, unparalleled in size; and no mean judges 
of wine, from different parts of the country, pronounced 
my 'Scuppernong hock' the best of wine." Mr. Wel- 
ler's plantation, which appears to have been composed 
of Scuppernongs, is described as follows: "The re- 
sult of my vineyard enterprise and industry therein, 
is about a dozen acres of flourishing vines, mostly on 
scaffolding, or as canopies, covering continuously with 
branches (and when in bearing, with leaves and fruit) 
overhead, from 8 to 10 feet high, and nothing is seen 
between these canopies and the ground but main stems 
of the vines, and the posts or rock pillars to support 
the frame -work above. My annual jield of wine has 
been as high as 60 barrels ; besides entertaining hun- 
dreds of visitors at 25 cents each entrance, and 50 
cents per gallon for select grapes gathered to carry 
away. My vineyard is the largest, I learn, in the 
South, and I am encouraged to enlarge it every year." 

Dr. Peter Wylie, of North Carolina, is said to have 
succeeded in securing hybrids of the Scuppernong with 
other species, but they were lost. Of late years, T. V. 
Munson has taken up the problem ,^ and has several 
hybrids between this species and the Herbemont type. 
In 1868, J. Van Buren printed a small book upon "The 
Scuppernong Grape," at Memphis. 

In all this various history, we have seen that four 
species of grapes have been chiefly concerned in the 


evolution of the immense commercial viticulture of 
Eastern America, and all these species are native to the 
country. They are the fox -grape {Vitis Ldbrusca), the 
summer-grape {Vitis mstivalis), the Muscadine {Vitis 
rotundifolia) , and the river -bank grape {Vitis vidpina). 
Other native species have been concerned in the creation 
of our viticulture, and still others promise much to the 
futui-e experimenter ; but enough has now been said 
to acquaint my reader with some of the salient features 
of the rise of our common varieties of grapes. I shall 
add to the chapter a list of our native species of 
grapes, with some remarks respecting their economic 
importance, and to that list and the catalogue of 
books, the student who desires to explore the subject 
is referred. 

The grape -growing of eastern America has increased 
enormously in recent years, largely under the stimulus 
of the Concord. We have already had Raflnesque's 
record of the vineyards of 1830 (page 49), and we have 
had statistics of the acreage about Cincinnati (page 
63). In closing this part of our subject, we will find 
it of interest to take a rapid sweep of the growth of 
the industry. In 1852, Robert Buchanan made the 
following survey of the vineyards "in the United 
States" which were planted for wine -making purposes: 
"The Ohio River is already called the * Rhine of Amer- 
ica,' and Cincinnati the center of the grape region in 
this valley. Within twenty miles around the city, more 
than 1,200 acres are planted in vineyards — at Ripley 
and Maysville above, about 100 acres — at Vevay, 
Charleston, and Louisville below, over 250 acres are in 
vine culture; — making 1,550 acres for the Ohio Valley 
alone, which is a low estimate. 


"At Hermann, Mo., about forty or fifty acres are in 
vineyards; and in the vicinity of St. Louis, and some 
other parts of the state, probably twenty or thirty acres 
more; a few at Belleville, 111., and elsewhere in that 
state. Near Beading, Pa., several vineyards are planted 
and some excellent wines made. In North and South 
Carolina, the Scuppernong wines have been made for 
many years, but the number of acres in grape culture 
is to the writer unknown. A few vineyards are in cul- 
tivation in the vicinity of New York and Philadelphia — 
and Burlington, New Jersey; but more with a view to 
supply the market with grapes than to make wine. 
Efforts have been made in the interior of Kentucky, in 
Tennessee, in western New York, and on the southern 
shore and islands of Lake Erie, to cultivate the vine 
for making wine, but suflBicient time has not yet elapsed 
for a fair trial." The United States census returns for 
1840 gave the wine crop as 124,734 gallons. In 1850 
it was 221,249 gallons. The census of 1890 returns a 
total grape acreage in the United States of 401,261 
acres. Of this area, 213,230 acres were in California, 
and are, therefore, outside our present discussion, for 
the Pacific slope grows the Old World wine grapes, not 
the ameliorated natives. Nearly 200,000 acres, then, 
were devoted to native -grape culture and these yielded 
9,655,905 gallons of wine and 225,636 tons of table 
grapes. Western New York, — comprising the central 
lakes, or Catawba districts, and the Chautauqua county 
or Concord district — is the heaviest producer of any 
like area. In 1890, New York state produced 2,528,250 
gallons of wine and 60,687 tons of table grapes; and 
these figures are closely seconded by Ohio and Missouri. 
In 1894, the grape acreage of western New York was 


estimated at 58,000 acres. These are astounding figures, 
when one considers that a century ago profitable grape- 
culture was impossible in the country, and that many 
men now living have seen the introduction of most of 
the varieties of grapes which are successfully grown; 
and all the varieties have been bred directly or indi- 
rectly from the unpromising vines which grow wild 
in our own fields and woods. 

Why Did the Early Vine Experiments Failf 

The reader has no doubt been curious to know, 
from the outset, why the early attempts to grow the 
European grape had resulted in such disastrous fail- 
ure; and now that we are approaching the end of our 
narrative, I shall proceed at once to gratify his curi- 
osity. The failure was the result of an obscui^e sick- 
ness which caused the leaves to die and drop, and the 
grapes to rot. There was just enough indefiniteness 
and speculation about these diseases to make the early 
grape literature attractive, but in these impertinent 
days, when we have dragged the whole panorama of 
nature across the slide of a microscope, we have done 
away with the mystery, and speak of these diseases 
familiarly as the downy mildew and black-rot, — or, 
to be exact, as Peronospora viticola and Lcestadia 
BidiceUii. If these Latin epithets had been in- 
vented in the days of Dufour and his contemporaries, 
imagination would have been squelched, and all the 
naive and delightful writing about the behavior of the 
electric fluid, the strange influences of the different 
soils, the vagaries of the seasons, the curious effects of 


modes of propagation, and the like, would have been 
lost to future generations! 

Some of the failure was also due to the root -louse 
or phylloxera, but it was probably chiefly the result 
of the incursions of the fungous disorders mentioned 
in the last paragraph. The singular thing about 
all these troubles is that they are native Americans. 
From time unknown, they have preyed upon the native 
grapes; but they were not serious upon these natives, 
because all the most amenable types of grapes had long 
since perished in the struggle for existence, and the 
types which now persist are necessarily those which 
are, in their very make-up or constitution, almost im- 
mune from injury, or are least liable to attack. The 
mildew, for example, finds little to encourage it in the 
tough and woolly leaf of the fox -grape, and the phyl- 
loxera finds tough rations on the hard, cord -like roots 
of any of our eastern species of grapes. But an un- 
naturalized and unsophisticated foreigner, being unused 
to the enemy and undefended, falls a ready victim; or 
if the enemy is transported to a foreign country, the 
same thing occurs. These diseases are evidently not 
native to our Pacific coast region, and the European 
wine -grape was early introduced there about the mis- 
sions of the Franciscans, and it has thrived until the 
present day. In fact, the grape industry of California 
is like to that of Europe, — chiefly wine and raisins, — 
and is built upon the Old World wine -grape {Vitis 
vinifera); and for this reason I have omitted, in the 
previous account, all reference to our Pacific grape- 
culture. But the phylloxera is now introduced upon 
the Pacific coast, and is doing much mischief. 

The mildew and black -rot and phylloxera have all 


been introduced into Europe, where they have wrought 
widespread havoc. I quot^ Lodeman's account of 
the introduction of these fungi, in his "Spraying of 
Plants : " 

"The mildew was first discovered in France in 1878. MiUardet 
saw it in September of that year upon some American grape 
seedlings growing in the nursery of the Soci^t^ d 'Agriculture de 
la Gironde, and Plachon at the same time recognized it on the 
leaves of Jacquez grapes at Coutras, and also received it from 
various departments of Lot -et- Garonne, and of Rhone. The dis- 
ease spread rapidly, and was so destructive that in 1882 the fruit 
in many vineyards was almost entirely destroyed. The climate of 
France appears to be peculiarly adapted to the growth of this 
mildew, which flourishes as well upon the varieties of Vitis rinif- 
era as upon our American species. In moist seasons it is fully as 
energetic as in America, or even more so. The leaves fall from 
the vines, and the grapes are thus prevented from ripening prop- 
erly. Even in cases in which the vines do not lose all their 
foliage, a partial reduction is sufficient to decrease the amount of 
sugar in the grapes to such an extent that their value for wine is 
very greatly lessened. Many growers did not at first realize the 
seriousness of this disease. In some vineyards it even obtained a 
firm foothold without being noticed, for the portions of the fungus 
which are on the exterior of the leaves are borne on the under 
side. When, however, it became established in a certain district, 
all doubts regarding its seriousness vanished, and the vineyardists 
found themselves confronted by a disease which not only threat- 
ened to destroy their vines, but which gave unmistakable proof 
of its power to do so. The American disease of grapes commonly 
known as black -rot was first discovered in the vineyards of France 
in August, 1885. Mr. Ricard, the steward of an estate situated 
at the gates of the small town of Ganges, at the borders of 
l'H6rault, was the first to call attention to the presence of this 
fungus. He saw that his grapes turned brown, then black, while 
still remaining upon the vine. He sent some of these diseased 
grapes to the viticultural laboratory of I'^-cole de Montpellier, 
where Messrs. Viala and Ravaz recognized the parasite. They 
went to the affected vineyard, and saw that only about thirty 


hectares in the plain of Ganges showed diseased grapes. In 
these vineyards the harvest was reduced about one-half. Imme- 
diate and energetic steps were taken to exterminate the fungus, 
but in 1886 it again appeared. The season proved to be dry, 
however, and very little damage was done. The area of distri- 
bution was, nevertheless, considerably extended. On July 25, 
1887, Prillieux received diseased grapes from Azen, in Lot-et- 
Garonne, and was directed by the minister of agriculture to 
proceed to the infected district. He found that black -rot existed 
throughout the entire valley of the Garonne as far as Aiguillon. 
In some vineyards it was so well established that there appeared 
to be no doubt that the disease had been present at least a year 
before its discovery in I'H^rault; it was consequently impossible 
to determine the first place of infection in France. The disease 
was new, and at the first not very serious, so that its presence 
had been overlooked perhaps for more than one year." 

But the greatest consternation has been caused, in 
European countries, by the furious spread of the phyl- 
loxera. This insect was introduced into France in 
1863 on vines from the United States, but it was not 
discovered until some years later. About 1865, the 
root disease which it produces began to attract atten- 
tion, and so violent was its spread that the French 
government expended large sums to stamp it out, and, 
finally, in 1874, a reward of 300,000 francs was offered 
for a satisfactory remedy. About 1870, the cause of 
the disease was determined; and then it was found 
that the root -louse is the normal form of an insect 
which also produces galls upon the leaves. This leaf- 
gall form of the insect was described in New York 
by Dr. Asa Fitch in 1854. It is not our purpose to 
follow the fortunes of the phylloxera in its triumphant 
march over Europe. It is enough to say that there 
are no remedies which can be universally applied. In 
this dilemma, the French turned to America to dis- 


cover why the phylloxera is not a scourge in the land 
of its birth. The cause was found in the practical 
immunity of the native vines. At once, there was a 
demand for cuttings of our wild phylloxera -resistant 
grapes. But some of the cuttings would not grow, 
whereas others grew without difficulty. Upon investi- 
gation, it was found that cuttings of two species had 
been sent as one species, and the result of the inquiry 
has been to clearly distinguish two native grapes which 
theretofore had been much confounded. These are the 
frost -grape ( Vitis cordifolia) and the river -bank grape 
( Vitis vulpina, or V, riparia). The latter is now widely 
used in Europe as stocks upon which to graft the wine- 
grape; and so it has come that the species which has 
produced nothing better in the way of fruit than the 
Clinton (page 75) is now a corner-stone of the 
viticulture of the Old World. Other native species 
have contributed to the phylloxera -resistant stocks of 
Europe, but this species is chief. The fourth edition 
of the Descriptive Catalogue of Bush & Son & Meiss- 
ner has the following remarks of this use of American 
vine -stocks: "Already millions of American grape- 
vines are growing in France, hundreds of thousands 
in Spain, Italy, Hungary, etc. California also im- 
ported many cuttings of riparia [river -bank grape] 
vines to graft thereon their European (or vinifera) 
sorts, which succeed there on our phylloxera -resisting 
stocks. In February, 1894, Senator Fair purchased 
from us half a million of such cuttings for his new 
1,000-acre vineyards near Lakeville, California." 

All the old accounts, however, seem to show that 
the chief cause of the failure of the European vines 
in America was fungous disease. One of the very 

dupour's account op the diseases 93 

earliest accounts of this mischievous disorder is John- 
son's, in 1806, although his entire discussion of it is 
as follows: "The Mildew sometimes attacks the grapes 
and fruit, when the vine has been planted in too wet 
a situation, or when the weeds are suffered to prevail, 
but never when the vineyard has a gentle declivity." 
The first explicit account of the vine diseases which 
I know was made twenty years later. "The different 
diseases that I have seen afflicting vines are not nu- 
merous," writes John James Dufour, in 1826. "They 
may be denominated, 1st. the Mildew, called Charbon 
or Tache, by the French, whose meaning is, by Char- 
bon, burnt to a coal, or like a coal; and by Tache , a 
black speck: 2d. Unripeness of the young wood, 
which causes it to be frostbitten: 3rd. Short jointed, 
called Sorbatzi, by the Swizzers: 4th. Exhaustion, 
by overbearing." Only one of these classes, the mil- 
dew, need attract our attention at this time. Dufour 
describes it as follows: "The Mildew, or Charbon, is 
the most severe disease that sickeneth grapevines. 
One of the first symptoms is a mouldy and black dust 
that appears some time on the under surface of the 
leaves in the months of July and August, and grows 
gradually more intense. Black specks then appear on 
the young parts of the shoots, and on the fruit, as if 
made with a hot bit of iron : the leaves then crisp and 
fall, the fruit becomes black, and dries, and what fruit 
seems to escape the sickness, will not ripen well, and 
remain uncommonly sour; the young shoots will be 
extremely brittle, and the pith black." It is very likely 
that two diseases are confounded in this descrip- 
tion. The account of the leaves suggests the downy 
mildew; but the description of the affected shoots and 


fruit is more likely that of the black -rot. B. T. Gal- 
loway, Chief of the Division of Vegetable Pathology in 
the United States Department of Agriculture, tells me 
that specimens of grapes affected with ^'charbon/' col- 
lected by an early botanical traveler in the Ohio Valley, 
have the black -rot. 

Alphonse Loubat, who wrote the third American 
grape book ("The American Vine Dresser's Guide," New 
York, 1827, alternate pages English and French), and 
who made an experiment at grape culture on Long 
Island, was also overtaken by the vine diseases. "Here 
he strove," writes Andrew S. Fuller, in the "Record of 
Horticulture" for 1866, "against mildew and sun -scald 
for several years, but had to yield at last, as the ele- 
ments were too much for human exertions to overcome. 
An old resident of Brooklyn related to the writer, a 
few years since, many incidents connected with Lou- 
bat's experiments ; one of which was, that to prevent 
mildew on the fruit, each bunch was enveloped in 
paper; consequently they had to be uncovered when 
exhibited to visitors. This, when the grapes were 
ripening, consumed most of Loubat's time." Spooner 
says that Loubat " planted a vineyard of forty acres at 
New Utrecht, Long Island, which had 150,000 vines of 
various sizes, and for some years flattered himself with 
hopes, which resulted in disappointment." Spooner's 
account of his own experiments illustrates the common 
experience with the foreign gi'ape, and also affords 
further evidence that fungous disease was the chief 
cause of the disasters: "In the year 1827 I planted 
fifty foreign vines, some of which were from France, 
and obtained from Mr. Parmentier and Mr. Loubat — 
others were from Germany, and obtained from Mr. 


Knudsen. In four years I was able to exhibit five 
kinds of fine grapes at the horticultural exhibition of 
New York at Niblo's Garden; but the vines produced 
few good bunches, and very soon none at all. The 
vines and shoots continued to grow for several years, 
but the fruit was mouldy and black before the period 
of ripening, and thus were worthless." 

With the extension of the grape-planted acres, 
the diseases attacked the varieties of native origin, 
like the Catawba and Isabella, and they finally ruined 
the grape industry of the Cincinnati region. The rot 
of grapes had begun to attract much attention about 
Cincinnati previous to 1850. In 1859, Cist made the 
following record of it: "In the Ohio Valley, for the 
last three or four years, the grape crop has been much 
injured by mildew and rot, diseases incident to bad 
seasons, or sudden atmospheric changes. Many reme- 
dies have been tried, but none has yet been found 
effectual in these cases. It is difficult, by any mode of 
vineyard cultivation, pruning or training, to conquer 
disease arising from atmospheric causes." Probably 
the first published specific for this rot was the follow- 
ing, which was sent to the Commissioner of Patents in 
1853, by Anthony Miller, of Portland, Calloway county, 
Missouri: "My observations have led me to the be- 
lief that the 'rot* in the grape depends on a weakness 
in the vine, even when the ground is rich and well 
manured. This disease, consisting only in weakness, 
befalls the vines soon after they bloom. Following 
this notion, I thought of a remedy, which consists of 
the following: I take fresh cow manure (without 
straw, leaves, etc., being mixed with it), which I mix 
in a ditch, or in a large hogshead, with slops, wash- 


water, etc. I stir it once a day until it begins to fer- 
ment, and leave it standing several days, and then it 
is ready for use. When I have no cow manure, any 
other animal manure, mixed with the offals of tobacco, 
ashes, lime, and rain-water, will answer the same pur- 
pose. Of this fluid I pour about a gallon around the 
roots of every grape-vine, making a small ditch, five 
or six inches deep, around the vine, to keep the fluid 
from running off. When it has soaked into the 
ground, I cover up the ditch with earth. A month 
after the blooming of the vine, I repeat this again. In 
this manner I have kept ray grapes sound." 

It was thirty years after this mephitic compound 
was recommended to the public, that the first and 
great specific for the mildew and black -rot — the Bor- 
deaux mixture — was perfected by the illustrious Mil- 
lardet and his compeers, in France. It has required 
the travail of two centuries to give us this simple mix- 
ture of blue-stone and lime; but now the most careless 
urchin may have the knowledge which Dufour, Adlum, 
Loubat, Buchanan, Longworth, and all the rest, would 
have given all their worldly goods to possess! 

To us, the black -rot and the mildew have come to 
be subjects of secondary importance. We hold the 
secret and we can apply the remedy. But they were 
serious matters in the old days. The following narra- 
tive, written by Longworth in 1849, is proof of this, 
and it also admirably illustrates the common adage 
that "misfortunes never come singly:" 

"My oldest vine-dresser. Father Ammen, has gone 
the way of all flesh, and I regret his end. He was a 
worthy old man. Some twelve years since, he lost his 
wife, and deeply regretted her loss. He assured me, 

A VINE -dresser's PLIGHT 97 

with tears in his eyes, *she was just so good in the 
vineyard as one man, and he might just so well have 
lost his horse.' He got a second wife, but she was of 
hasty temper, and gave the old man as good as he 
sent. Finally, she told him if he would give her five 
dollars, she would leave him, and never see him more. 
*Give you five dollars!' said the old man: *I will do 
no such thing; but if you go and never come back, I 
will give you ten dollars.' The money was paid, and 
the old man was relieved of that trouble; but one that 
he deemed greater came. I have heretofore said, that 
after being my tenant ten years, he was ruined by sel- 
ling his share of the crop for eight hundred dollars. 
He cleared out; went to the north part of the state; 
bought land, and planted a vineyard. The location 
was too far north. His vines were killed, and he came 
back a poor man, and began a new vineyard on a farm 
of mine, adjoining his old one, on which his son-in- 
law has resided since he left it. This year his vine- 
yard came into bearing, and the old man's heart re- 
joiced to think that he should again be able to sit 
under the shade of his favorite tree, and enliven his 
heart with wine of his own making. But, alas! the 
rot came, and blasted his prospects. He became dis- 
pirited; which, the cholera discovering, a few days 
since, seized his victim. He was taken to the house of 
his son-in-law (for he lived alone, and I could not 
prevail on him to take a Frau for the third time), 
when they urged him to take medicine, but he refused. 
He was told if he did not, in a few hours he must die. 
'What I care?' said the old man, *I take none. What 
I want to live for? My grapes all rotten!' A few 
hours, and he was no more. Peace to his ashes." 



Synopsis of the American Species of Grapes 

If America is a land of grapes, it will profit us to 
make an inventory of such wild types as botanists 
consider to be distinct enough to be called species. 
This synopsis is reduced and adapted from the au- 
thor's monograph of the VitaceaB in Gray's Synoptical 
Flora, 1897 (Vol. i., Part i., Fascicle ii.). 

VITIS. The Vine. Grape-vine. A widespread genns in 
the North Temperate zone, richest in species in North America. 
The species undergo marked adaptations to local conditions, and 
several of them hybridize freely, so that the study of them is 
perplexing; and the difficulty is increased by the fact that the 
foliage varies in character on different parts of the plant, and 
herbarium material cannot properly represent the fruit. The 
large viticultural interests of North America, outside of the hot- 
houses and the Pacific Slope and Mexico, have been developed 
within the century from the native species of grapes (chiefly 
Viiis Labmsca and V, cestivalis), and their hybrids with the Old 
World wine-grape (Viiis vinifera). The last is almost exclusively 
grown in California, and is sometimes inclined to be sponta- 
neous. The genus naturally divides itself, in North America, 
into two groups, — the muscadines, and the true grapes. 

I. MuscADiNiA, the muscadines. Bark bearing prominent 
lenticels, never shredding; nodes without diaphragms; tendrils 
simple; flower-clusters small and not much elongated; berries 
usually falling singly ; seeds oval or oblong, without a distinct 
stipe -like beak. 

Vitis rotundifolia, Michx. (Muscadine, Southern Fox-grape, Bul- 
lace or Bullit or Bull Grape.) Fig. 17, page 84. Vine with 
hard, warty wood, running even sixty to one hundred feet over 
bushes and trees, and in the shade often sending down forking 
aerial roots: leaves rather small to medium (2 to 6 inches 
long), dense in texture and glabrous both sides (sometimes 
pubescent along the veins beneath), cordate-ovate and not 
lobed, mostly with a prominent and sometimes an acuminate 


point (bnt somewhat contraoted above the termination of the 
two main side veins), the under snrface finely reticnlated 
between the veins, the teeth and the apex angular, coarse 
and acute, the basal sinus shallow, broad and edentate ; 
petiole slender and (like the young growth) fine -scurfy, about 
the length of the leaf-blade: tendrils (or flower- clusters) 
discontinuous, every third node being bare: fruit-bearing 
clusters smaller than the sterile ones, and ripening from three 
to twenty grapes in a nearly globular bunch: berries falling 
from the cluster when ripe, spherical or nearly so and large 
(half inch to inch in diameter), with very thick and tough 
skin and a tough, musky flesh, dull purple in color without 
bloom (in the Scuppemong variety silvery amber-green), 
ripe in summer and early autumn; seeds ^- to %-inch long, 
shaped something like a coffee berry.— Grows on river banks, 
swamps, and rich woodlands and thickets, S. Delaware to 
N. Florida and west to Kansas and Texas. Known to vine- 
yardists chiefly as the parent of the Scuppemong. Has been 
hybridized with V, Lahntsca, V, rupestriSf and V. vinifera, 

Vitis Munsonianaf Simpson. (Mustang Grape of Florida, Bird or 
Everbearing Grape.) Very slender grower, preferring to run 
on the ground or over low bushes, more nearly evergreen 
than the last, flowering more or less continuously: leaves 
smaller, thinner, and more shining, more nearly circular in 
outline and less prominently pointed; the teeth broader in 
proportion to the blade, and more open or spreading: clus- 
ters larger and more thyrse-like: berries a half smaller than 
in the last, and often more numerous, shining black, with 
a more tender pulp, acid juice, no muskinesss, and thinner 
skin; seeds half smaller than in the last.— Dry woods and 
sands, Florida, at Jacksonville, Lake City, and southwards, 
apparently the only grape on the reef keys; also in the 
Bahamas. Difficult to distinguish from V, rotundifolia in 
herbarium specimens, but distinct in the field. Not in do- 

II. EuviTis, the true grapes. Bark without distinct lenticels, 
on the old wood separating in long thin strips and fibers; nodes 
provided with diaphragms ; tendrils forked; flower-clusters mostly 


large and elongated; berries usually not falling singly, but tend- 
ing to shrivel and hang on the stem; seeds pyriform. 

A. Green-leaved grapes, mostly marked at maturity by absence 
of prominent white, rusty, or blue tomentum or scurf or con- 
spicuous bloom on the leaves beneath (under surface some- 
times thinly pubescent, or minute patches of floccose wool in 
the axils of the veins, or perhaps even cobwebby); the foli- 
age mostly thin: tendrils intermittent, i. e., every third joint 
bearing no tendrils (or inflorescence). V, cinerea and V. 
Arisonica are partial exceptions, and might be looked for 
in A A. 

B. Vulpina-like grapes, characterized by thin light or bright 
green mostly glossy leaves (which are generally glabrous 
below at maturity except, perhaps, in the axils of the veins, 
and in V. Champini), with a long or nt least a prominent 
point, and usually long and large, sharp teeth, or the edges 
even jagged. 

c. Leaves broader than long, with truncate -oblique base ( F. 
Treleasei might be sought here). 
Vitis rujyestriSj Scheele. (Sand, Sugar, Rock, Bush, or Mountain 
Grape.) Shrub 2 to 6 feet high, or sometimes slightly climb- 
ing, the tendrils few or even none, diaphragms plane and 
rather thin: leaves reniform to reniform- ovate (about 3 to 4 
inches wide and two-thirds as high), rather thick, smooth 
and glabrous on both surfaces at maturity, marked by a char- 
acteristic light glaucescent tint, the sides turned up so as to 
expose much of the under surface, the base only rarely cut 
into a well marked sinus, the margins very coarsely angle- 
toothed, the boldly rounded top bearing a short, abrupt point, 
and sometimes two lateral teeth enlarged and suggesting lobes: 
stamens in fertile flowers recurved laterally or rarely ascend- 
ing, those in the sterile flowers ascending: cluster small, 
slender, open and branched: berries small (>i- to X-ineh in 
diameter), purple -black and somewhat glaucous, pleasant- 
tasted ripe in late summer; seeds small and broad.— Sandy 
banks low hills and mountains, District of Columbia and 
8. Pennsylvania to Tennessee, Missouri, and S. W. Texas. 
One or two varieties in cultivation, and it hybridizes freely. 
Promising for the experimenter. 

• • • • 


Var, dissectay Eggert, is a form with more ovate leaves and 
very long teeth, and a strong tendency towards irregular 
lobing. — Missouri. 

cc. Leaves ovate in outline, with a mostly well marked sinus. 

D. Diaphragms (in the joints or nodes) thin: young shoots 
not red; leaves not deeply lobed. 

Vitis montieola, Buckley. (Sweet Mountain Grape.) A slender 
trailing or climbing plant (reaching 20 to 30 feet in height), 
with very long and slender branches, the young growth 
angled and floccose (sometimes glabrous), the diaphragms 
plane and rather thin: leaves small and thin (rarely reaching 
4 inches in width, and generally from 2 to 3 inches high), 
cordate-ovate to triangular -ovate, with the basal sinus rang- 
ing from nearly truncate -oblique to normally inverted-U- 
shaped, rather dark green but glossy above and grayish green 
below, when young more or less pubescent or even cobwebby 
below, the blade either prominently notched on either upper 
margin or almost lobed, the point acute and often prolonged, 
margins irregularly notched with smaller teeth than in V, 
rupestris: clusters short and broad, much branched: berries 
medium or small (averaging about }4-inch in diameter), 
black or light colored, seedy, sweet; seeds large (about 
J^-inch long), and broad. — Limestone hills in S. W. Texas. 
This species has been the subject of much misunderstanding. 
Buckley's description seems to be confused, but his speci- 
mens of r. moniicola (in Herb. Acad. Philad.) are clearly the 
small-leaved and glabrous species here designated. See, also, 
Viala, "Une Mission Viticole en Amerique,'* 1889, 67; and 
r. Berlandierif below. The species has no value in its fruit, 
but it may be useful as a stock on limy soils. 

ntis vulpitMf L. (Riverbank or Frost Grape.) Fig. 15, page 76. 
A tall -climbing plant, with a bright green cast to the foliage, 
normally glabrous young shoots, large stipules, and very 
thin diaphragms: leaves thin, medium to large, cordate - 
ovate, with a broad but usually an evident sinus, mostly 
showing a tendency (which is sometimes pronounced) to three 
lobes, generally glabrous and bright green below, but the 
veins and their angles often pubescent, the margins vari- 


ously, deeply and irregularly toothed and sometimes cut, the 
teeth and the long point prominently acute: fertile flowers 
bearing reclining or curved stamens, and the sterile ones 
long and erect or ascending stamens: clusters medium to 
large on short peduncles, branched (often very compound), 
the flowers sweet-scented: berries small (less than X'^^^^ 
in diameter), purple-]^lack with a heavy blue bloom, sour 
and usually austere, generally ripening late (even after frost) ; 
seeds rather small and distinctly pyriform. — New Brunswick 
to N. Dakota, Kansas, and Colorado, and south to W. Virginia, 
Missouri, and N. W. Texas; the commonest grape in the north- 
ern states west of New England, particularly along streams. 
Commonly known as Fitis riparia. Variable in the flavor 
and maturity of the fruit. Forms with petioles and under 
surfaces of leaves pubescent sometimes occur. Occasionally 
hybridizes with V. Labnisca eastward, the hybrid being known 
by the tomentose young shoots and unfolding leaves, and the 
darker foliage which is marked with rusty tomentum along 
the veins of the less jagged leaves. Parent, either direct or 
crossed, of Clinton, Elvira, Pearl, and others. 

Var. pr(BCoXj Bailey, is the June grape of Missouri, the 
little sweet fruits ripening in July. 

In a note attached to his specimens (now at the Jardin des 
Plantes, Paris), Michaux speaks of this as being the species 
known to the French voyageurs upon the Ohio and Missis- 
sippi: " Fitis riparia.— Wgne des battures par les fran^ais qui 
voyagent sur TOhio & le Misissipi, parce que cette espece 
croit sur les rochers et les sables inond^s annuellement, par 
les debordements. Le raisin en est le meilleur de tons ceux 
qui se trouvent, dans TAmerique soptentrionale. L'on ne 
trouve nullement cette espece a Test des Monts Alleganies, 
Ohio & Misissipi. Le raisin est meur en Aoust et croit sur les 
Isles & sur les Bochers qui bordent les Rivierres Shavanon 
ou Cumberland, Cheroquis ou Tenassee, ainsi que sur les 
Rives de Green River, dans TEtat de Kentucky. II est plus 
difficile de trouver du Raisin sur les Isles ou plages sablon- 
neuses du Misissippi et de TOhio parce qu elles sont trop 
longtemps submerg^es.^^ 

There is a curious confusion respecting the name of this 


species. LinnaBus described a Vitis vulpina ("fox-grape") in 
1753, and preserved specimens of it in his herbariam. Our 
grapes have been so much misunderstood that there have 
been various guesses at the identity of Linnaeus' specimens. 
It has been thought that they represent the true fox -grape, 
or Vitia Ldbrusca. Again it was thought that they are the 
muscadine type, and the name vulpina was once used in 
place of Michaux's rotundifolia (page 98). Then for many 
years the name was dropped altogether. Finally Planchon, 
the most recent monographer of the genus, declared Lin- 
naeus' specimens to be the Vitis riparia of Michaux, although 
he did not substitute the name vulpina for the more recent 
ripavia. Professor Britton later examined the specimens, and 
also pronounced them to be V, riparia. In the above mono- 
graph I therefore used the older name (r. vulpina). Since 
that time, however, I have myself examined Linnaeus' speci- 
mens in London, and find that he had specimens of two spe- 
cies under the name of vulpina. On one sheet are two 
leaves, one marked V. rinifera and the other V, vulpina^ 
both in Linnaeus' hand. The former is the wine-grape (T. 
I'lwi/era), and the latter is the river-bank grape ( F. riparia). 
Another herbarium sheet, however, has a large flowering 
specimen, labelled, in Linnaeus' hand, V. vulpina, and this 
is the frost-grape ( V, cordifolia). It would have been better 
to have taken this latter specimen as Linnaeus' type, and to 
have made the name vulpina supplant cordifolia; but since 
the other disposition has been made of the case, I shall not 
make the change. 

Vitis Treleasei, Munson. Plant shrubby and much branched, 
climbing little, the small and mostly short (generally shorter 
than the leaves) tendrils deciduous the first year unless find- 
ing support, internodes short, the diaphragms twice thicker 
(about i^j-inch) than in V, vulpina and shallow -bicon- 
cave: stipules less than one quarter as large as in V. 
vulpina: leaves large and green, very broad -ovate, or even 
reniform-ovat« (often wider than long), thin, glabrous and 
shining on both surfaces, the basal sinus very broad and 
open and making no distinct angle with the petiole, the 
margin unequally notch -toothed (not jagged, as in F. vul- 


piiM), and indistinctly S-lobed, the apex much shorter than 
in V. vulpina: fertile flowers with very short recurved sta- 
mens, sterile ones with ascending stamens: cluster small (2 
to 3 inches long) : the berries %-inch or less thick, black 
with a thin bloom, ripening three weeks later than F. vulpina 
when grown in the same place; thin-skinned; pulp juicy 
and sweet; seeds small. — Brewster county, S. W. Texas, and 
New Mexico to Bradshaw Mountains, Arizona. Little known, 
and possibly a dry -country form of V, vulpina. In habit it 
suggests V. Arizonicaj var. gldbra, from which it is distin- 
guished, among other things, by its decidedly earlier- flower- 
ing and larger leaves with coarser teeth and less pointed 

Vitis Longiif Prince. Differs from vigorous forms of V, vulpina 
in having floccose or pubescent young growth: leaves deci- 
dedly more circular in outline, with more angular teeth and 
duller in color, often distinctly pubescent beneath: stamens 
in fertile flowers short and weak and laterally reflexed, those 
in sterile flowers long and strong: seeds larger. — N. W. Texas 
and New Mexico. Regarded by French authors as a hybrid, 
the species V, rupestris, vulpina^ candicanSf and cordifolia 
having been suggested as its probable parents. It is vari- 
able in character. In most of its forms it would be taken 
for a compound of F. rupestris and F. vulpina, but the latter 
species is not known to occur in most of its range. It was 
very likely originally a hybrid between F. rupestris (which 
it sometimes closely resembles in herbarium specimens except 
for its woolliness), and some tomentose species (possibly with 
F. Ariz<mica or F. Doaniana), but it is now so widely dis- 
tributed, and grows so far removed from its supposed pa- 
rents, and occurs in such great quantity in certain areas, 
that for taxonomic purposes it must be kept distinct. It is 
not unlikely that it has originated at different places as the 
product of unlike hybridizations. Late French writers desig- 
nate the jagged -leaved forms as F. SoUynis, and the dentate 
forms as F. Nuevo-Mexicana, This interesting grape was 
found some thirty years ago by Engelmann in the Botanic 
Garden of Berlin, under the name of Vitis Solonis, without 
history. Engelmann guesses (Bushberg Cat. ed. 3, 18) the 


name to be a corruption of "Long's.*' It is probable that 
the plant was sent to European gardens as Vitis Lotigii — very- 
likely from Prince's nursery — and the name was misread on 
the label. The original name, which was duly published by 
Prince, with description, may now be restored. Vitis Longii 
is no doubt capable of yielding useful varieties for the 

Far. microspermay Bailey, is a very vigorous and small- 
seeded form, which is very resistant to drought. — Red River, 
N. Texas. 

Vitis Champini, Planch. Probably a hybrid of V. rupestris or 
r. Berlandieri and V. candicans, bearing medium to large reni- 
form or reniform- cordate leaves which are variously pubes- 
cent or cobwebby but become glabrous, the growing tips 
mostly white - tomentose : berries very large and excellent. — 
S. W. Texas. In some places associated with V. candicanSf 
V, Berlandieri, and V. monticola only, and in others with the 
above and V, rupestris. Often found composing dense thick- 
ets. Very promising as a parent of horticultural varieties. 
(Fig. 18.) 

DD. Diaphragms very thick and strong: young shoots bright 
red: leaves often strongly lobed. 

Vitis palmata, Vahl. (Red or Cat Grape.) A slender but strong- 
growing vine, with small, long-jointed, angled, red, glabrous, 
herb- like shoots and red petioles: leaves small to medium, 
ovate -acuminate, dark green and glossy, sometimes indis- 
tinctly pubescent on the nerves below, the sinus obtuse, the 
blade either nearly continuous in outline or (commonly) 
prominently lobed or even parted, coarsely notched: stamens 
in the sterile flowers long and erect : clusters loose and long- 
peduncled, branched; the flowers opening late: berries small 
and late (J^- to %-inch in diameter), black, with or without 
purple bloom, with little juice, and commonly containing but 
a single seed, which is large and broad. — A handsome plant; 
Illinois and Missouri to Louisiana and Texas. More prom- 
ising as an ornamental plant than as a vineyard plant. The 
flesh is usually thin and the skin thick and tough, but the 
flavor is often vinous and good. 


BB. Cordifolia-Iike grapes, with thickish and dull-eolored of 
grajisli green leaves often holding BOme close dull pubeB- 
ceiice below at, maturity (and the shoots and leaves nearly 

s pubeacetit when young], the teeth mostly 
ciil, the point mostly triangular 

always m< 

abort or at least r 

and conspicuous. 
:;. Plant strong and climbing, with stout persistent tendrils. 
0. Young shoots terete, and glabrous or very soon bei^oming 

Viti3 coriUfolia, Michx. (True Frost Grape, Chicken, Raccoon, 


or Winter Grape.) One of the most vigorous of American 
vines, climbing to the tops of the tallest trees » and some- 
times making a trunk 1 or 2 feet in diameter: intemodes 
long; the diaphragms thick and strong: petioles long; leaves 
long^-cordate, triangular- cordate with a rounded base, or 
cordate -ovate, undivided but sometimes very indistinctly 
3-lobed or 3 -angled, the basal sinus rather deep and narrow 
and normally acute, the margin with large angular acute 
teeth of different sizes, and the point long and acute, the 
upper surface glossy and the lower bright green and either 
becoming perfectly glabrous or bearing some close and fine 
inconspicuous grayish pubescence on the veins: stamens 
erect in the sterile flowers and short reflexed- curved in the 
fertile ones: clusters long and very many-flowered, most of 
the pedicels branched or at least bearing a cluster of flow- 
ers: berries numerous and small (about %-inch in diameter), 
in a loose bunch, black and only very slightly glaucous, late 
and persistent, with a thick skin and little pulp, becoming 
edible after frost; seeds medium and broad. — In thickets 
and along streams from Pennsylvania (and probably S. New 
York) to E. Kansas and southwards to Florida and Texas. 
It gives little promise to the experimenter. 

Var. fcetida, Engelm., has fetidly aromatic berries, and grows 
in the Mississippi Valley. 

Var. sempervirenSj Munson. A glossy-leaved form, holding its 
foliage very late in the season : leaves sometimes suggesting 
forms of F. palmata.—S, Florida. 

Far. HeUerif Bailey. Leaves more circular (i. e., lacking the 
long point), and the teeth round-obtuse and ending in a 
short muero. — Kerr county, S. Texas, 1,600 to 2,000 feet. 

DD. Young shoots angled, and covered the first year with to- 
mentum or wool. 

Vitis Baileyanaj Munson. ('Possum Grape.) Less vigorous 
climber than V. cordifolia, rather slender, with short inter- 
nodes and very many short side shoots: petioles shorter and 
often pubescent; leaves frequently smaller, the larger ones 
shortly but distinctly 3-lobed (lobes mostly pointed and 
much spreading), bright green but not shining above and 


gray below and pubescent at maturity only on the veins, 
the point only rarely prolonged and often muticous, the teeth 
comparatively small and notch -like and not prominently 
acute, sinus more open: floral organs very small; the sta- 
mens reflexed in the fertile flowers; pedicels short, making 
the bunch very compact: berries about the size of F*. cordi- 
folia, black and nearly or quite bloomless, late; seed small 
and notched on top.— Mountain valleys, 800 to 3,000 feet 
altitude, S. W. Virginia and adjacent West Virginia and 
W. North Carolina, Tennessee and N. Georgia; also at com- 
mon levels in the uplands of West -central Georgia. The 
eastern counterpart of V, Berlandieri, Not promising for 
the cultivator. 

Vitis Berlandieri, Planch. (Mountain, Spanish, Fall, or Winter 
Grape.) A stocky, moderately climbing vine, with mostly 
short intemodes and rather thick diaphragms: leaves me- 
dium-large, broadly cordate-ovate or cordate -orbicular (fre- 
quently as broad as long), glabrous and glossy above, 
covered at first with gray pubescence below but becoming 
glabrous and even glossy except on the veins, the sinus 
mostly inverted -U-shaped in outline but often acute at the 
point of insertion of the petiole, the margin distinctly angled 
above or shortly 3-lobed and marked by rather large open 
notch -like acute teeth of varying size, the apex mostly pro- 
nounced and triangular- pointed : stamens long and ascending 
in the sterile flowers, laterally recurved in the fertile ones: 
clusters compact and compound, mostly strongly shouldered, 
bearing numerous medium to small (%-inch or less in diam- 
eter) purple and slightly glaucous very late berries, which 
are juicy and pleasant- tasted ; seed (frequently only one) 
medium to small. — Limestone soils along streams and hills, 
S. W. Texas and adjacent Mexico. Well marked by the 
gray-veined under surface of the leaves. No varieties in 
cultivation, and gives little promise in that direction, al- 
though it crosses with one or two other species; but valu- 
able as phylloxera- proof stock on limy soils. 

Vitis cinerea, Engelm. (Sweet Winter Grape.) Climbing high, 
with medium to long intemodes and thick and strong dia- 
phragms; leaves large, broadly cordate -ovate to triangular- 


cordate -ovate (generally longer than broad), the sinus mostly 
wide and obtuse, the margin small -notched (teeth much 
smaller than in F. Berlandieri) or sometimes almost entire, 
mostly distinctly and divaricately 3 -angled or shortly 3-lobed 
towards the apex, the triangular apex large and prominent, 
the upi)er surface cobwebby when young but becoming dull 
dark green (not glossy), the under surface remaing ash-gray 
or dun -gray webby- pubescent : stamens in sterile flowers 
long, slender and ascending, in the fertile ones short, and 
laterally recurved: cluster mostly loose and often straggling, 
containing many small black berries, these only slightly if 
at all glaucous, ripening very late, and after frost becoming 
sweet and pleasant; seeds small to medium. — Along streams, 
mostly in limy soils, central Illinois to Kansas and Texas 
and Mexico, also N. Florida. Readily distinguished from 
r. (BStivalis by the triangular -topped sharply 3-lobed ash- 
gray leaves and the gray tomentum of the young growth. No 
varieties in cultivation, but it hybridizes with F. rupesiris 
and r. Linsecomii. 

Var, Floridana, Munson. Growing tips rusty -tomentose, as 
are sometimes the veins on the under sides of the leaves: 
cluster longer- peduncled and more compound. — Manatee 
county, Florida, and apparently also in Arkansas ; not un- 
likely a compound with F. cestivaliSj but the leaves have the 
characteristic shape of F. cinerea. Not to be confounded 
with any form of F. CariJxFa, because of the lobed tri- 
angular-topped leaves and much larger teeth. 

Var. canescenSf Bailey. A form with rounded or heart-like 
leaves, the upper half of the leaf lacking the triangular and 
3-lobed shape of the type. — St. Louis, Missouri, and S. Illi- 
nois, to Texas, 
cc. Plant scarcely climbing, the tendrils perishing if failing 
to find support. 
Vitis Arisonieay Engelm. (Canon Grape.) Plant weak, much 
branched, with short intemodes and thick diaphragms, 
branchlets angled: leaves mostly small, cordate -ovate and 
with a prominent triangular- pointed apex, the sinus broad 
or the base of the blade even truncate, the teeth many and 
small and pointed or mucronate, the margin either contin- 


nous or very indistinctlj 3-lobed (or sometimes prominently 
lobed on young growths), the leaves and shoots white -woolly 
when young, but becoming nearly glabrous with age : sta- 
mens ascending in sterile flowers and recurved in the fertile 
ones: bunches small and compound, not greatly, if at all, 
exceeding the leaves, bearing 20 to 40 small black berries 
of pleasant taste; seeds 2 to 3, medium size. — Along river 
banks* W. Texas to New Mexico and Arizona, mostly south 
of the 35th parallel, to S. E. California and N. Mexico. Not 
promising horticulturally 

Var, glabra, Munson. Plant glabrous, with glossy and mostly 
thinner and larger leaves. — In mountain gulches and canons, 
with the species and ranging northwards into S. Utah. 
Readily distinguished from V, monticola by its triangular- 
pointed and small-toothed leaves. 

BBB. Orbicular-scallop-leaved species of the Pacific Coast. 

Viiis Calif ornica, Benth. Vigorous species, tall-climbing upon trees 
(Fig. 19), but making bushy clumps when not finding support, 
the nodes large and diaphragms rather thin: leaves mostly 
round -ren if orm (the broader ones the shape of a horse's 
hoof -print), rather thin, either glabrous and glossy or (more 
commonly) cottony- canescent until half grown and usually 
remaining plainly pubescent below, the sinus ranging from 
very narrow and deep to broad and open, the margins vary- 
ing (on the same vine) from finely blunt-toothed to coarsely 
scallop -toothed (the latter a characteristic feature), the upper 
portion of the blade either perfectly continuous and rounded 
or sometimes indistinctly 3-lobed and terminating in a very 
short apex: bunches medium, mostly long-peduncled and 
forked, the numerous small berries glaucous -white, seedy 
and dry but of fair flavor; seed large (J^- to ^^jj-inch long), 
prominently pyriform. — Along streams in central and N. Cal- 
ifornia and S. Oregon. Leaves becoming handsomely colored 
and mottled in fall. Of small promise horticulturally. 

AA. Colored -leaved Grapes, marked by thick or at least firm 
foliage, the leaves prominently rusty or white -tomentose or 
glaucous-blue below. F. cinerea, V, Arizonica, and possibly 
F. Calif omica may be sought here; and late -gathered forms 
of V. hicolor may be looked for in A. 


B. Leavea onl; flctcculeot or cobwebby or glaucous below when 
fully grown (i. e., not covered with a thick, dense, felt-like 
tomentum, except BometimeB in F. Doaniana). 

c. White-tipped grapes, comprising species with the ends of 
the growing shoots and the under surfaces of the leaves 
whitlnh or gray. 
Vitis Oirdiana, Munson. (Valley Grape.) Strong climbing vine, 
with thick diaphragms : leaves medium to large and rather 
thin, broadly cordate -ovate, with a rather deep and narrow 
sinus and nearly continuous or obscurely 3-lobed outline 
(sometimes markedly 3-lobed on young shoots], the teeth 
many and small and acute, the apex short -triangular or 
almost none, the under, surface remaining closely aahy- 
tomenlose : clusters large and very compound, each one 
dividing into three or four nearly equal sections, which are 
in turn shouldered and thyrae-like: berries small, black, and 


slightly glauoousy the skin thin bat tough, pulp finally be^ 
coming sweet; seeds medium in size, pyriform. — S. Cali- 
fornia, south of the 36th parallel. Differs from V, Cali/or- 
nica in the more pubescent shoots and foliage, smaller and 
sharp teeth, decompound clusters, smaller less glaucous 
berries, and smaller seeds. Shoots of V. Calif omica often 
bear leaves with small and mutioous teeth, and such speci- 
mens without the flower- clusters are difficult to distinguish 
from this species. Some of the forms which have been 
referred to V, Girdiana are evidently hybrids with the wine- 
grape, V. vinifera; and at best the plant is imperfectly 
understood and its merits as a species are yet to be deter- 

Vttis Doanianaj Munson. Plant vigorous, climbing high or re- 
maining bushy if failing to find support, with short inter- 
nodes and rather thin diaphragms : leaves bluish green in 
cast, mostly large, thick and firm, cordate-ovate or round- 
ovate in outline, bearing a prominent triangular apex, the 
sinus either deep or shallow, the margins with very large 
angular notch -like teeth and more or less prominent lobes, 
the under surface usually remaining densely pubescent and 
the upper surface more or less floccose: cluster medium to 
small, bearing large (X-inch and less in diameter), black, 
glaucous berries of excellent quality ; seeds large (J^- to 
%-inch long), distinctly pyriform. — Chiefly in N. W. Texas, 
but ranging from Greer county, Oklahoma, to beyond the 
Pecos River in New Mexico. The species varies greatly in 
pubescence, some specimens being very nearly glabrous at 
maturity and others densely white -tomentose. The plant 
would pa^s at once as a hybrid of V. vulpina and V. candi- 
canSf except that the former does not often occur in its 
range. It is very likely a hybrid, however, and P. candicana 
seems to be one of the parents. Promising as a parent of 
varieties for the dry regions. 

cc. Rusty -tipped grapes, comprising the eestivalian group, the 
unfolding leaves and (except in V. bicolor) the young shoots 
distinctly ferragineous, and the mature leaves either rusty 
or bluish below, or sometimes becoming green in P. bicolor, 

Vitis cBStivalis, Michx. (Summer, Bunch, or Pigeon Grape.) 


Strong, tall -climbing yine, with medium-short Intemodes, 
thick diaphragms, and often pubescent petioles: leaves mostly 
large, thinnish at first but becoming rather thick, ovate - 
cordate to round-cordate in outline, the sinus either deep 
(the basal lobes often overlapping) or broad and open, the 
limb always lobed or prominently angled, the lobes either 
3 or 5, in the latter case the lobal sinuses usually enlarged 
and rounded at the extremity, the apex of the leaf broadly 
and often obtusely triangular, the upper surface dull and 
becoming glabrous and the under surface retaining a cover- 
ing of copious rusty or red -brown pubescence which clings 
to the veins and draws together in many small tufty masses: 
stamens in fertile flowers reflexed and laterally bent: clus- 
ters mostly long and long-peduneled, not greatly branched 
or even nearly simple (mostly interrupted when in flower), 
bearing small (^^-inch or less in diameter), black, glaucous 
berries, which have a tough skin, and a pulp ranging from 
dryish and astringent to juicy and sweet; seeds medium size 
(^•inch or less long), two to four.— Chemung county. New 
York, and Long Island to central Florida, and westward 
through S. Pennsylvania to the Mississippi and Missouri. A 
marked type among American grapes, being readily dis- 
tinguished from other species by the reddish fuzz of the 
under sides of the leaves. Most of the tomentose- leaved 
species have been at one time or another confounded with 
it, but when allowed to stand by itself, it is not a difficult 
species to understand. Vitis csstivalis has given rise to more 
cultivated varieties than any other species except V, La- 
brusca (see page 81). Michaux's original specimens are well 
preserved in Paris, and they have been properly understood 
by American botanists. (See Fig. 16, page 82.) 

Var. glaueaf Bailey. Lieaves (and mature wood) glaucous-blue 
on the body beneath, but the veins rusty: berries and seeds 
larger. S. W. Missouri to N. Texas. Much like V, bicolor, 
but leaves thicker and more pubescent below, and tips of 
shoots rusty-tomehtose. 

Var, Linseeomiif Munson. (Post-oak, Pine -wood, or Turkey 
Grape.) More stocky than V, (BsUvdUSf climbing high upon 
trees but forming a bushy clump when not finding support: 


leaves densely tomentose or velvety below: berries large 
(%- to %-inch in diameter), black and glaucous, mostly 
palatable ; seeds mostly much larger than in V, CBStivalis 
(often %-inch long).— High post-oak {Quercus stelUita) lands, 
S. W. Missouri to N. Texas and £. Louisiana. Very likely 
derived from the aBstivalis type through adaptation to dry 
soils and climates. Perhaps worth recognition as a geo- 
graphical species. Of great promise to the cultivator. 

Far, Bourquinianaf Bailey. A domestic offshoot, represented 
in such cultivated varieties as Herbemont and Le Noir, dif- 
fering from V, (BStivalis in its mostly thinner leaves, which 
{like the young shoots) are only slightly red-brown below, 
the pubescence mostly cinereous or dun -colored or the under 
surface sometimes blue-green: berries large and juicy, black 
or amber- colored.— A mixed type, some of it probably a 
direct amelioration of F. cesHvalis, and some hybridized with 
the wine -grape (V, vinifera). Much cultivated South, and 
the parent of many excellent varieties (see page 81), which 
Munson (Texas Farm and Ranch, Feb. 8, 1896) arranges in 
two sections, — the Herbemonts and the Devereuxs. 

Vitis hicolor, LeConte. (Blue Grape, or Summer Grape of the 
North.) A strong, high -climbing vine, with mostly long 
internodes and thick diaphragms, the young growth and 
canes generally perfectly glabrous and mostly (but not 
always) glaucous -blue, tendrils and petioles very long : 
leaves large, round -cordate -ovate in outline, glabrous and 
dull above and very heavily glaucous -blue below, but losing 
the bloom and becoming dull green very late in the season, 
those on the young growth deeply 3-5-lobed, and on the 
older growths shal lowly 3-lobed, the basal sinus running 
from deep to shallow, the margins mostly shallow -toothed 
or sinuate -toothed (at least not so prominently notch -toothed 
as in V. (estivalis): cluster mostly long and nearly simple 
(sometimes forked), generally with a long or prominent 
peduncle: the purple and densely glaucous berries of me- 
dium size (X-ii^<^h or less in diameter), sour but pleasant- 
tasted when ripe (just before frost); seeds rather small. — 
Abundant northwards along streams and on banks, there 
taking the place of F. cestivalis. Ranges from New York 


and Illinois to the mountains of W. North Carolina, and to 
W. Tennessee. Well distin^ished from F. astivalis (at least 
in its northern forms) by the absence of rufous tomentum, 
the blue-glaucous small -toothed leaves, and long petioles 
and tendrils. It has been misunderstood because it loses its 
glaucous character in the fall. Of small promise horticul- 
tural ly. 
Vitis CarilHBa, DC. Climbing, with flocculent- woolly (or rarely 
almost glabrous) and striate shoots; tendrils rarely contin- 
uous: leaves cordate-ovate or even broader, and mostly 
acuminate- pointed, sometimes obscurely angled above (but 
never lobed except now and then on young shoots), becom- 
ing glabrous above but generally remaining rufous -tomentose 
below, the margins set with very small mucro- tipped sinuate 
teeth: cluster long and long-peduncled, generally large and 
very compound : berry small and globose, purple ; seed 
obovate, grooved on the dorsal side. — A widely distributed 
and variable species in the American tropics, running into 
white -leaved forms (as in F. Blancoif Munson). Little 
known in the United States: Louisiana, Lake City, N. Flor- 
ida; swamp, near Jacksonville, Florida. 

6B. Leaves densely tomentose or felt-like beneath throughout 
the season, the covering white or rusty white. 

c. Tendrils intermittent (every third joint with neither tendril 
nor inflorescence opposite). 

Vitis candicans, Engelm. (Mustang Grape.) Plant strong and 
high climbing, with densely woolly young growth (which is 
generally rusty tipped), and very thick diaphragms: leaves 
medium in size, and more or less poplar- like, ranging from 
reniform- ovate to cordate-ovate or triangular- ovate, dull 
above but very densely white -tomentose below and on the 
petioles, the basal sinus very broad and open or usually 
none whatever (the base of the leaf then nearly truncate), 
deeply 5-7 -lobed (with enlarging rounded sinuses) on the 
strong shoots and more or less indistinctly lobed or only 
angled on the normal growths, the margins wavy or sinuate - 
toothed: stamens in the sterile flowers long and strong, 
those in the fertile flowers very short and laterally reflexed: 
cluster small, mostly branched, bearing a dozen to twenty 


large (%-inch or less In diameter) purple or light -colored 
or even whitish berries, which have a thick skin and a very 
disagreeable, fierj flavor; seeds large, pyriform.— E. Texas, 
mostlj on limestone soils. . Not promising to the experi- 

Var. coriacea, Bailey. (Leather-leaf or Calloosa Grape.) Dif- 
fers from the species chiefly in bearing much smaller (about 
%-inch in diameter), thinner- skinned, and more edible 
grapes, with mostly smaller seeds, and perhaps a less ten- 
dency to very deep lobing in the leaves on young shoots, 
and x>ossibly rather more marked rustiness on the young 
growths. — Florida, chiefly southward, in which range various 
Texan plants reappear. The more agreeable quality of the 
fruit is probably the result of a more equable and moister 
- climate. More promising than the species. 

Vitis Simpsonif Munson. Distinguished by mostly much-cut 
leaves on the young shoots, and comparatively thin, large, 
and large-toothed ones on the main shoots, rusty white 
tomentum below and very prominently brown -tomentose 
young growths, — the character of the leaves and tomentum 
varying widely, the foliage sometimes becoming almost blue- 
green below. — Central Florida: Lake county; Manatee River, 
etc. This is likely a hybrid of F. (BStivalis and F, oandieanSj 
var. coriacea. Some forms of it are very like F. Ldbrttseaf 
and might be mistaken for that species, 
cc. Tendrils mostly continuous (a tendril or inflorescence op- 
posite every node). 

Fitis Labruscaf L. (Fox Grape, Skunk Grape.) Fig. 11, page 58. 
A strong vine, climbing high on thickets and trees; young 
shoots tawny with much scurfy down : leaves large and thick, 
strongly veined (especially beneath), broadly cordate -ovate, 
mostly obscurely 3-lobed towards the top (on strong growths 
the sinuses sometimes extending a third or even half the 
depth of the blade, and rounded and edentate at the bottom) 
or sometimes nearly continuous in outline and almost del- 
toid-ovate, the petiolar sinus mostly shallow and very open 
(ranging to narrow and half or more the length of the 
petiole), the margins shallowly scallop -toothed with mucro- 
pointed teeth (or sometimes almost entire), and the apex 


and lobes acute, the upper surface dull green and becoming 
glabrous, but the lower surface densely covered with a 
tawny white, dun -colored or red-brown tomentum: stamens 
long and erect in the sterile flowers and (in wild forms) 
short and recurved in the fertile ones: raceme short (berries 
usually less than 20 in wild types), generally simple or very 
nearly so, about the length of the peduncle when in flower : 
berries large and nearly spherical, ranging from purple - 
black (the common color) to red-brown and amber-green, 
generally falling from the pedicel when ripe, variable in 
taste but mostly sweetish musky and sometimes slightly 
astringent, the skin thick and tough; seeds very large and 
thick. — New England and southwards in the Alleghany re- 
gion and highlands to West -central Georgia. Not known to 
occur west of £. New York in the North, except at the 
southern end of Lake Michigan (E, J, Hill), and in S. Indi- 
ana, by Munson. The parent of the greater part of 
American cultivated grapes. It is often confounded with 
r. CBsiivalis in the South, from which it is distinguished by 
the habitually continuous tendrils, the more felt -like leaves 
which are not floccose, and especially by the small -toothed 
leaves, very short clusters and large berries and seeds. Fitis 
Ldbrusca is the parent stem of the greater part of American 
grapes. It is well represented in Catawba, Concord and 
Worden. In its wild state it is very variable in size, color 
and quality of fruit, and in size of cluster. Its berries tend 
to fall from the stem, and the ^^ shelling'' of grapes in vine- 
yards may be a lingering of this ancestral trait. See Mun- 
son, in Amer. Gard., zii. 580. 

American Orape Literature 

The best illustration of the high part which the 
grape has played in the industrial development of the 
country, is afforded by a survey of the voluminous 
literature of the subject. Probably no less than a 
hundred books, counting the various editions, have 
been published in this country on the grape. The 


following catalogue of the volumes of this American 
literature which are in the author's library at the 
moment this volume goes to press (excluding works 
devoted exclusively to wines), will give the reader a 
good idea of this species of writing : 

Adlum, John. A Memoir on the Cultivation of the Vine in 
America, and the Best Mode of Making Wine. Washing- 
ton : Davis & Force. Copyr. 1823. 1823.* Pp. 142. 

. The same. 2d ed. Washington : William Greer. 

Copyr, 1828. 1828. Pp. 180. 

Allen, J. Fisk. A Practical Treatise on the Culture and Trea^ 
ment of the Grape Vine : Embracing its history, with direc- 
tions for its treatment, in the United States of America, in 
the open air, and under glass structures, with and without 
artificial heat. 2d ed., enlarged. Boston : Dutton & Went- 
worth. Copyr. 1848. 1848. Illustr. Pp. 247. 

. The same. 3rd ed., enlarged and revised. New York: 

C. M. Saxton, Barker & Co. Copyr. 1853. 1860. Illustr. 
Pp. 330. 

Andrae, E. K. a Guide to the Cultivation of the Grape Vine 
in Texas, and Instructions for Wine -Making. Dallas, Texas: 
Texas Farm and Ranch Pub. Co. Copyr. 1890. 1890. Illustr. 
Paper. Pp. 45. 

Bailey, L. H. American Grape Training. An account of the 
leading forms now in use of training the American Grapes. 
New York : Rural Publishing Co. Copyr. 1893. 1893. Illustr. 
Pp. 95. (Republished and extended in *^The Pruning- Book.") 

Bright, William. Bright's Single Stem, Dwarf and Renewa] 
System of Grape Culture, adapted to the vineyard, the grapery, 
and the fruiting of vines in pots, on trellises, arbors, etc. New 
York: C. M. Saxton, Barker & Co. Copyr. 1860. 1860. 
Pp. 123. 

. The same. 2d ed. New York: C. M. Saxton, Barker 

& Co. Copyr. 1860. 1861. Pp. 155. 

*DatG of Imprint. 


Buchanan, Robert. The Culture of the Grape, and Wine Mak- 
ing ; With an Appendix Containing Directions for the Culti- 
vation of the Strawberry, by N. Longworth. 3rd ed. Cin- 
cinnati : Moore & Anderson. Copyr. 1852. 1852. lUustr. 
Pp. 142. 

. The same. 4th ed. Cincinnati : Moore, Anderson & 

Co. Copyr. 1852. 1853. Illustr. Pp. 142. 

. The same. 5th ed. Cincinnati : More, Wilstach, Keys 

& Co. Copyr. 1852. 1855. Illustr. Pp. 142. 

The same. 6th ed. Cincinnati : More, Wilstach, Keys 

& Co. Copyr. 1852. 1860. Illustr. Pp. 142. 

The same. 7th ed. Cincinnati : Moore, Wilstach, Keys 

& Co. Copyr. 1852. 1861. Illustr. Pp. 142. 

. The same. 8th ed. Philadelphia : Crawford & Co. 

Illustr. Pp. 142. No date. 

BusBT, James. Grapes and Wine. A visit to the Principal Vine- 
yards of Spain and France ; giving a minute account of the 
different methods pursued in the cultivation of the vine and the 
manufacture of wine ; with a catalogue of the different varieties 
of grape ; an attempt to calculate the profits of cultivating the 
vine ; an estimate of the profits of Malaga fruit, &c., &c. New 
York : C. S. Francis & Co. ; Boston : J. H. Francis. 1848. 
Pp. 166. 

Bush & Son & Meissner. Illustrated Descriptive Catalogue of 

American Grape Vines. A Grape Growers' Manual. 3rd ed. 

St. Louis: R. P. Studley & Co. Copyr. 1883. 1883. Illustr. 

Pp. 153. 
. The same. 4th ed. St. Louis: B. P. Studley & Co. 

Copyr. 1894. 1895. Illustr. Pp. 208. 

Chorlton, William. The American Grape Grower's Guide. In- 
tended especially for the American climate. Being a practical 
treatise on the cultivation of the grape vine in each department 
of hothouse, cold grapery, retarding house, and outdoor cul- 
ture. With plans for the construction of the requisite build- 
ings, and giving the best methods of heating the same. New 
York : CM. Saxton & Co. Copyr. 1852. 1856. Illustr. 
Pp. 171. 


. The same. New edition. With descriptions of the later 

ezetic grapes, by Dr. George Thorber. New York: Orange 
Judd Go. Copyr. 1883. 1883. Illastr. Pp. 208. 

The same. New edition. With descriptions of the later 

exotic grapes, and a select list of the native varieties, by Dr. 
George Thurber. New York: Orange Judd Co. Copyr. 1887. 
1890. niustr. Pp. 211. 

The Cold Grapery, from Direct American Practice : being 

a concise and detailed treatise on the cultivation of the exotic 
grape vine, under glass, without artificial heat. New York : 
J. C. Riker. Copyr. 1853. 1863. Illustr. Pp. 95. 

Cope, F. J. (See Saunders, Wm.) 

CuTTEB, EuzABETH H. (See Muench, Frederick.) 

De Berneaud, Thiebaut. The Vine Dresser's Theoretical and 
Practical Manual, or the Art of Cultivating the Vine ; and 
Making Wine, Brandy, and Vinegar. With descriptions of the 
species and varieties of the vine ; the climates, soils, and sites 
in which each can be successfully cultivated, with their times 
of blossoming and bearing ; the diseases of the vine and means 
of prevention. With instructions for the preservation of wines, 
brandies, vinegars, confections, &c., of the grape ; for the care 
of the wine-cellar, the economy of the vineyard ; and a brief 
sketch of the diseases incidental to the vine dresser. From 
the 2nd French edition, by the translator of Le Solitaire, Le 
Notti Romane, &c. New York: P. Canfield. 1829. Illustr. 
Pp. 158. 

Denniston, G. Grape culture in Steuben county, N. Y. Albany: 
C. Wendell. 1865. Maps. Pp. 22. Reprint from Trans. N^ 
Y. State Agric. Soc. xxiv. 

Du Breuil [A.]. The Thomery System of Grape Culture. From 
the fVench. New York: Excelsior Publishing House. No 
date. Illustr. Pp. 60. 

Du Breuil, A. (See Warder, John A.) 

DuFOUB, John James. The American Vine Dresser's Guide, be- 
ing a Treatise on the Cultivation of the Vine, and the Process 
of Wine Making, adapted to the Soil and Climate of the United 
States. Cincinnati : 8. J. Browne. Copyr. 1826. 1826. 
Illustr. Pp. 317, 


EiBKN, GusTAV. The Raisin Industry. A Practical Treatise on 
the Raisin Grapes, their History, Culture and Curing. San 
Francisco : H. S. Crocker & Co. Copyr. 1890. 1890. Illustr. 
Pp. 223. 

Fisher, 8. I. Obserrations on the Character and Culture of the 
European Vine, during a Residence of Five Years in the Vine- 
growing Districts of France, Italy and Switzerland. To which 
is added The Manual of the Swiss Vigneron, as adopted and 
recommended by the Agricultural Societies of Geneva and 
Berne, by Mens. Brun Chappius, and The Art of Wine Making, 
by Mens. Bulos. Philadelphia : Key & Biddle. Copyr. 1834. 
1834. Pp. 244. 

Flago, William J. Three Seasons in European Vineyards: 
Treating of vine -culture ; Tine disease and its cure ; wine- 
making and wines, red and white ; wine drinking, as affecting 
health and morals. New York : Harper & Brothers. Copyr. 
1869. 1869. Illustr. Pp. 332. 

Fulleb, Andrew S. The Grape Culturist : A Treatise on the 
Cultivation of the Native Grape. New York : Davies & Kent. 
Copyr. 1864. 1864. Illustr. Pp. 262. 

. The same. New and enlarged edition. New York : 

Orange Judd & Co. Copyr. 1867. Illustr. Pp. 286. 
. The same. New, revised and enlarged edition. New 

York : Orange Judd Co. Copyr. 1894. Illustr. Pp. 282. 

GOESSMAKK, C. A. Contribution to the Chemistry of the Ameri- 
can Grape Vine. Paper. Pp. 16. Reprint from Proc. Amer. 
Chemical Soc. ii. No. 1. 

Grant, C. W. Manual of the Vine, including Illustrated Cata- 
logue of Vines (8th ed.) ; and. Grape Vines : Description of 
Stock of Vines for sale at lona Island (3rd ed.). lona : C. W« 
Grant. Copyr. 1*864. Illustr. Paper. Pp. 101. 

Harasztht, a. Grape Culture, Wines and Wine -Making. With 
notes upon Agriculture and Horticulture. New York : Harper 
& Brothers. Copyr. 1862. 1862. Illustr. Pp. 420. 

Haskell, Georoe. An Account of Various Experiments for the 
Production of New and Desirable Grapes, and an Account of 
Forty Varieties obtained by Hybridization. Ipswich, Mass.: 
1877. Paper. Pp. 18. 

. A Narrative of the Life, Experience, and Work of an 

American Citizen. [Autobiog^phy. Contains an account of 
the anthor's work with American Grapes]. Ipswich, Mass.: 
1896. Pp. 156. 

HoARE, Clement. A Practical Treatise on the Cultivation of the 
Grape Vine on Open Walls. Second American edition. Bos- 
ton : William D. Ticknor. Copyr. 1837. 1840. Illustr. Pp. 

. The same ; to which is added a descriptive account of an 

improved method of planting and managing the roots of grape 
vines. Third American edition. Boston : William D. Ticknor 
& Co. Copyr. 1837. 1845. Illustr. Pp. 192. 

. The same. Fourth American edition. Boston : William 

D. Tickner & Co. Copyr. 1837. 1848. lUus. Pp. 180. 

A Practical Treatise on the Cultivation of the Grape Vine 

on Open Walls, with a descriptive account of an improved 
method of planting and managing the roots of grape vines. To 
which is added an appendix containing remarks on the culture 
of the grape vine in the United States. New York : H. Long 
& Brother. 1847. Illustr. Pp. 209. 

HoFER, A. F. Grape Growing. A Simple Treatise on the Single 
Pole System, or How Grapes are Cultivated in the Upper Rhine 
Valley. New York : E. H. Libby. 1878. Illustr. Paper. 
Pp. 32. 

HoRTicoLA. (See Mohr, Frederick.) 

Hush ANN, George. The Cultivation of the Native Grape, and 
Manufacture of American Wines. New York: Geo. E. Wood- 
ward. Copyr. 1866. 1870. Illustr. Pp. 192. [The back- 
stamp is ** Grapes and Wine,'' and the book is often quoted 
under that title.] 

. The same. Fourth edition, Revised and rewritten. 

With several added Chapters on the Grape Industries of Cali- 
fornia. New York : Orange Judd Co. Copyr. 1895. 1896. 
Illustr. Pp. 269. 

American Grape Growing and Wine Making. With con- 

tributions from well-known Grape Growers, giving a Wide 
Range of Experience. New York: Orange Judd Co. Copyr. 
1880. 1880. Illustr. Pp. 243. 


liONOWORTH, N. The Cultivation of the Grape, and Manufacture 
of Wine. Also, Character and Habits of the Strawberry Plant. 
Cincinnati : L'Hommedieu & Co. 1846. Illustr. Paper. 
Pp. 19. 

LouBAT, Alphonse. The American Vine Dresser's Guide. New 
York: G. & C. Carwill. Copyr. 1827. 1827. Pp.138. [Pages 
alternately English and French.] 

. The same. New and revised edition. New York : D. 

Appleton & Co. Copyr. 1872. 1872. Portrait. Pp. 123. 
[Pages alternately English and French.] 

McMiNN, J. M. (See Saunders, Wm.) 

McMuRTRlE, Wm. Report upon Statistics of Grape Culture and 
Wine Production in the United States for 1880. Washington : 
Government Printing Office. 1881. Paper. Pp. 104. Special 
Rep. No. 36, U. S. Dept. of Agric. 

Mead, Peter B. An Elementary Treatise on American Grape 
Culture and Wine Making. New York : Harper & Brothers. 
Copyr. 1867. 1867. Illustr. Pp. 483. 

MiTZKY & Co., C. Our Native Grape. Grapes and Their Culture ; 
also Descriptive List of Old and New Varieties. Rochester : 
W W. Morrison. Copyr. 1893. 1893. Illustr. Pp. 218. 

MoHR, Frederick. The Grape Vine. A Practically Scientific 
Treatise on its Management. Explained from his own ex- 
perience and researches, in a thorough and intelligible manner, 
for vineyardists and amateurs in garden and vine culture. 
Translated from the German, and accompanied with hints on 
the propagation and general treatment of American varieties. 
By Horticola [Charles Siedhof] . New York : Orange Judd & 
Co. Copyr. 1867. 1868. Illustr. Pp. 129. 

MuENCH, Frederick. School for American Grape Culture : Brief 
but thorough and practical guide to the laying out of vineyards, 
the treatment of vines, and the production of wine in North 
America. Translated from the German by Elizabeth H. Cutter. 
St. Louis : Conrad Witter. Copyr. 1865. 1865. Pp. 139. 

MuNSON, T. V. Classification and Generic Synopsis of the Wild 
Grapes of North America. Washington : Government Print- 
ing Office. 1890. Paper. Pp. 14. Bulletin No. 3, Division 
of Pomology, U. S. Dept. of Agric. 


My Vineyard at Lakeview, by a western Grape Grower [A. N» 
Prentiss] . New York : Orange Jndd & Co. Copyr. 1866. 
Illustr. Pp. 143. 

Parker, E. and C. (See Warder, John A.) 

Persoz. New Process for the Culture of the Vine. Translated by 
J. O'C. Barclay, Surgeon U. S. N. New York : C. M. Saxton 
& Co. Copyr. 1856. 1857. Illustr. Paper. Pp. 58. Also in 
Saxton's (or Moore's) Rural Hand-Books, Fourth Series (with- 
out the plates). 

Phelps, R. H. The Vine : Its Culture in the United States. 
Wine Making from Grapes and other Fruit ; Useful Recipes, 
&c. Hartford : Case, Tiffany & Co. Copyr. 1855. 1855. 
Illustr. Paper. Pp. 83. 

iPhin, John. Open Air Grape Culture : A Practical Treatise on 
the Garden and Vineyard Culture of the Vine, and the Manu- 
facture of Domestic Wine. Designed for the use of amateurs 
and others in the Northern and Middle States. Profusely illus- 
trated with new engravings from carefully executed designs, 
verified by direct practice. To which is added a selection of 
examples of American vineyard practice, and a carefully pre- 
pared description of the celebrated Thomery System of Grape 
Culture. New York : C. M. Saxton. Copyr. 1862. 1863. 
Pp. 375. [The back- stamp of the book is *^ Grape Culture and 
Wine Making."] 

. Open Air Grape Culture : A Practical Treatise on the 

Garden and Vineyard Culture of the Vine. New York : Geo. 
E. Woodward & Co.; Orange Judd Co. Copyr. 1876. 1876. 
Illustr. Pp. 266. 

Prince, William Robert, aided by William Prince. A Treatise 
on the Vine ; Embracing its history from the earliest ages to 
the present day, with descriptions of above two hundred foreign 
and eighty American varieties ; together with a complete dis- 
sertation on the establishment, culture, and management of 
vineyards. New York : T. & J. Swords, G. & C. & H. Car- 
vill, E. Bliss, Collins- & Co., G. Thorbum & Sons ; Philadel- 
phia : Judah Dobson ; Boston : J- B. Russell ; Baltimore : 
Gideon B. Smith ; Richmond : James Winston ; Charleston, 
S. C: Joseph Simmons. Copyr. 1830. 1830. Dlustr. 
Pp. 355. 


Bafinesque, G. 8. American Manual of the Grape Vine and the 
Art of Making Wine : Including an account of 62 species of 
vines, with nearly 300 yarieties. An account of the principal 
wines, American and foreign. Properties and uses of wines 
and grapes. Cultivation of vines in America ; and the art to 
make good wines. Philadelphia. 1830. Ulustr. Paper. Pp. 64. 

Beemelin, Charles. The Vine Dresser's Manual, an Illustrated 
Treatise on Vineyards and Wine Making. New York : C. M. 
Sazton & Co. Copyr. 1855. 1855. Illustr. Pp. 103. Also in 
Saxton's Rural Hand-Books, Third Series, New York, 1856. 

. The Wine-Maker's Manual. Cincinnati : Robert Clarke 

& Co. Copyr. 1868. 1868. Illustr. Pp. 123. 

8AUKDERS, William. Both Sides of the Grape Question. Com- 
prising An Essay on the Culture of the Native and Exotic 
Grape, by William Saunders ; Physiography in its Application 
to Grape Culture, by F. J. Cope ; and A Contribution to the 
Classification of the Species and Varieties of the Grape Vine, 
with Hints on Culture, by J. M. McMinn. Philadelphia : J. 
B. Lippincott & Co. and A. M. Spangler. New York : CM. 
Saxton, Barker & Co. Copyr. 1860. 1860. Illustr. Paper. 
Pp. 96. 

SiEDHOF, Charles. (See Mohr, Frederick.) 

Spooner, Alden. The Cultivation of American Grape Vines, and 
Making of Wine. Brooklyn : A. Spooner & Co. Copyr. 1846. 
1846. Illustr. Pp. 96. 

Strong, W. C. Culture of the Grape. Boston : J. E. Tilton & 
Co. Copyr. 1866. 1867. Illustr. Pp. 355. 

Tomes, Robert. The Champagne Country. New York : George 
Boutledge & Sons. Copyr. 1867. 1867. Pp. 231. 

Tryon, J. H. A Practical Treatise on Grape Culture, with In- 
structions How to Prune and Train the Vine on the Horizontal - 
Arm System. Willoughby, Ohio. 1887. Illustr. Paper. 
Pp. 22. 

. The same. 2nd edition. Willoughby, Ohio. 1893. 

Illustr. Paper. Pp. 27. 

Wait, Frona Eunice. Wines and Vines of California. A Trea- 
tise on the Ethics of Wine Drinking. San Francisco : The 
Bancroft Co. Copyr. 1889. 1889. Illustr. Paper. Pp. 215. 

^ I 


Warder, John A. Vineyard Culture Improved and Cheapened. By 
A. Du Breuil. Translated by E. and C. Parker, of Longworth's 
Wine House. With Notes and Adaptations to American Cul- 
ture by John A. Warder. Cincinnati : Robert Clarke & Co. 
Copyr. 1867. 1867. Illustr. Pp. 337. 

Woodward, Geo. E. & F. W. Woodward's Graperies and Horti- 
cultural Buildings. New York : Geo E. Woodward & Co. ; 
Orange Judd Co. Copyr. 1865. Illustr. Pp. 139. 




When the history of American agriculture shall be 
written, the record of the many attempts to raise 
silk -worms and to establish a great silk -growing 
industry will form an important and suggestive 
chapter. Sketches of these attempts have been made 
from time to time, but there still lacks any full 
collation of the subject with collateral events. The 
literature of American silk-growing from the manu- 
facturer's side, however, is as extensive and satis- 
factory as that of any other agricultural -manufacturing 
industry. It is not my purpose to explore these 
interesting fields, but rather to present a rapid view 
of the rise and extent of mulberry -planting, more 
especially in the earlier days, and then to make 
observations on the subsequent evolution of the mul- 
berry fruits, — a subject which, strangely enough, 
has escaped the attention both of botanists and of 

Summary Sketch of the Early Silk Industry 

We have seen (page 10), when reviewing the 
early attempts at grape culture, that "silke worme 
seed" was sent to Virginia in 1621 by the London 
Company, along with grape vines. If we were tp 



trace the history of the attempts to raise silk in the 
New World, we should And that it is intimately asso- 
ciated with the efforts to grow the European types of 
grapes and to make wine. But the experiments in 
silk culture were even more persistent, and they were 
frequently the subjects of legislative encouragement 
and regulation. The very early efforts in Virginia 
were largely instigated by James I., whose insistence 
upon the feasibility of raising silk in England is as 
well known as his strenuous efforts to discourage the 
cultivation of tobacco in Virginia. The earliest writ- 
ing directed to any special crop in the New World 
was devoted to the raising of silk, and independent 
books and monographs have continued to appear until 
our own time. Justin Winsor's "Narrative and Criti- 
cal History" records that "The King addressed a letter 
to the Earl of Southampton with a review of Bonceil's 
treatise on the making of silk, and this was pub- 
lished by the Company in 1622. * * * 
The Company also published, in 1629, Observations 
* * * of Fit Rooms to keepe silk wormes in." 
In 1650, Edward Williams, under the signature of 
"E. W. Gent.," wrote an essay on Virginia, in which 
is an account of "The Discovery of Silk- worms, with 
their benefit. And Implanting of Mulberry Trees. 
Also the Dressing of Vines, for the rich Trade of 
making Wines in Virginia." After painting a vivid 
picture of the profit of silk -growing in China, Persia 
and other countries, he rises to Virginia and its mar- 
vellous great wild silk- worms, "a Countrey which Nature 
hath no lesse particularly assigned for the production, 
food and perfection of this Creature then Persia or 
China, stored naturally with infinities of Mulberry-- 


trees, some so large that the leaves thereof have by 
Prenehmeii beene esteemed worth 51. in which the 
indigenall and naturall Worme hath beene found as 
bigge as Wallnuts." Williams recalls that Virginia 
"is parallell with China, and the happiest Countries 
of the East and Westeme World in scituation," and 
it is "comparable to Persia." It is little wonder, 
then, that he should foresee that the colony was 
destined to be one of the greatest silk -producing 
countries of the world, particularly as the experiment 
had not yet been fully tried. 

But Williams was not alone in these fertile prophe- 
cies of Virginia. The writings of most of his contem- 
poraries, touching the climate and natural resources of 
this new land, can be compared to nothing else than 
the burning pictures which have been painted of our 
Pacific coast within our own time. Nothing was im- 
possible in Virginia and the adjoining lands to the 
southward. Here, in Virginia, the sugar-cane, cotton, 
indigo, ginger, rice and pepper, may grow alongside 
"all the Spiceryes of the Phillippines" ; com (grain) 
will yield two or three harvests in the season ; there 
are riches in copper and iron ore, "with great proba- 
bility of a Golden Mine"; the native fruits "are various 
and delicate"; the fishes "for number and tast com- 
parable to any other"; the beasts are many, of excel- 
lent flesh, "the Hides of divers usefuU, and the Furres 
extraordinary rich"; in short, as Williams thinks of it, 
"Virginia duly considered for exactnesseof temperature, 
goodnesse of soyle, variety of Staples, and capability of 
receiving what ever is produced in any other part of 
the World, gives the right hand of preheminence to no 
Ph"ovince under Heaven." 


In this abounding new country, all the rural 
schemes which had proved to be visionary in England 
could be expected to thrive. One of the most inflated 
of all these instructions for the betterment of the 
colony was a treatise by Samuel Hartlib, published in 
1655, called "The Reformed Virginian Silk Worm." 
The most remarkable part of this book is a letter 
"wherein the Experiment of a vertuous Lady of this 
Nation for the breeding of Silk -worms, is addressed 
unto the Planters of Virginia."* This lady sets herself 
before the reader in a most ambitious introduction : 
"Hearken wel you beloved Planters, to what in these 
few lines I shall declare unto you ; and is thus sent 
you in Print, that all of you may communicate the 
great and superlative good and benefit will be unto 
every one of you : who so is wise, itnll ponder these 
things, and give praise and glory to God, the Author 
of all good Inventions, how Providence having brought 
this to pass for all your exceeding great happiness and 
increase of store of wealth, with so much ease, so little 
labour, no cost unto you ; and in so short a time as 
fourty daies, this wealth flowes in upon you. * * * 
She hath I say this Spring found out (by the speciall 
blessing of God upon her intentions) so rare, so speedy,- 
and so costless a way and means for the feeding of 
Silkwormes ; by the triall and experiment she so luckily 
made, to the admiration of all that have seen or heard 
of it, as a thing scarce credible ; because not heretofore 
thought of, nay, as it were, held impossible by such 

*Hartlib was a prominent man of his time, and made what is probably the 
first definite plan for a school of aericultare. See a brief sketch of the man 
and n summary of his "Essay for the Advancement of Unsbandry'LeaminK." 
1651, in Garden and Forest, vol. z., p. 168. 

A woman's appeal 131 

Authours as have written of the ordering and feeding- 
of Silkworms: that this her invention being thus made 
known nnto you, her beloved friends in Virginia, she 
is most confident, and assures herself you will all there 
instantly, without further delay (which will be the joy 
of her heart) become great and rich Masters of this 
noble Silk -work to all your unspeakable wealth/' 
With dramatic art, she delays the unfolding of her 
wonderful secret until the torrent of appetizing sen- 
tences has roused the curiosity to the highest pitch. 
Now she is ready, and the reader is eager: "In the 
beginning of May last 1652, when her young Mulberry- 
tree in her Garden began to put out its buds, then her 
Silkworm-eggs began to hatch, as the nature of this 
wise creature is, when her food begins once to appear, 
she comes forth of her shell : she presently laying a 
Mulberry- leaf e upon these little crawling creatures, they 
came all upon it instantly ; then she carried the leaf 
and them upon it to the tree, upon whose leaves they 
made hast to be ; and there they day and night fed 
themselves, creeping from leafe to leafe, and branch to 
branch at their own liberties most pleasing to them- 
selves ; they grew and thrived wonderfully, and sur- 
passed in largness of body those other wormes she kept 
in her chamber (she having been many a year a Mistris 
of Silkworms, and kept them by the Book-rules) this 
good and prosperous beginning heightened her hopes. 
The wormes, as their nature is, cast off or slipped out 
of their skins four severall times, still growing greater 
and greater to the singular delight and contents of 
their Mistris. About 45 dayes thus feeding upon the 
leaves, they began that rare and glorious work of spin- 
ning their Silk-bottomes upon the leaves and branches 


of the tree ; such a gallant sight to behold, it ravished 
the Spectators, and their Mistris joy was crowned with 
excess of happiness herein and hereby, apparently find- 
ing the incomparable felicity this would prove to her 
dearly beloved Virginia, (for so you must give her 
leave to call it,) for she concluded, and so must all you, 
that this being thus effected in England, how much 
more with assured confidence will the wormes live, feed, 
and spin in Virginia f she upon serious and due con- 
sideration of this thing, gave God hearty and humble 
thanks." All of which means that, although it was 
customary then, as now, to feed worms on picked 
leaves, the worms will nevertheless live and thrive, 
under congenial conditions, upon the tree itself ! 

A book of such prophetic tendencies must, of 
course, end in poetry. The first georgic, written by 
John Ferrar, is dedicated to "the most Noble, Virginian 
natural Silk -Worm her wonderful, various, plentiful 
food ; The infinite, speedy, great wealth she will pro- 
duce to her protectors ; (in 45. days the time of her 
feeding) with small labour, cost, or skill, (learnt in an 
houres space by any child.) The singular aptness of 
that rare Superlative Climate, in Breeding them on so 
many several kinds of Trees in her Woods where they 
live, Feed and Spin, their mighty large, strange, 
double -bottoms [cocoons] of Silk: To the admiration 
of this our Old World ; but to the exaltation and glory 
of incomparable Virginia, in the New." 

^^Many a man the causes faine would heare, 
How these rare Worms came first or still come there. 
Insects produced are by heat and moisture 
Who in strange shapes and formes do oft appeare. 


In Spring our trees the Caterpillers reare ; 
Their trees likewise these noble creatures beare. 
And some proceed from eggs that soaped are 
From their enemies sight, which thing is rare. 
They feed not only on the Mulberry 
Which in our World sole food is held to be 
For all such precious Worms of that degree: 
But Poplar, Plum, Crab, Cake, and Apple tree. 
Yea Cherry, and tree called Pohickery: 
So on the Shrubs and Bushes feed full many 
Her Worms are huge whose bottoms dare 
With Lemmons of the largest size compare.'' 


The grand conclusion of the book disports in human 
worms : 

"Homo Vermis 

Wee all are creeping Worms of th' earth, 
Some are Silk -Worms great by birth, 
Glow- Worms some that shine by night. 
Slow -Worms others, apt to bite, 
Some are Muck -Worms, slaves to wealth. 
Maw -Worms some that wrong the health, 
Some to the publique no good willers, 
Cancker- Worms and Cater -pi Hers; 
Found about the earth wee'r crawling. 
For a sorry life wee'r sprawling. 
Putrid stuff we suck, it fills us. 
Death then sets his foot and kUls ns.'' 

The details of the early silk experiments are so 
many that we cannot follow them further with profit, 
but some of the leading: events must be noted. 
James I. attempted to compel the London Company 
to grow silk in Virginia. The Company imposed "a 
fine of ten pounds of tobacco upon every planter who 
did not cultivate at least ten mulberry trees for every 


100 acres of his estate," writes Brockett in his "Silk 
Industry in America." "This was in 1623, and for 
some time the business went on well." Under Sii* 
William Berkeley's governorship (beginning in 1641), 
<<a Reward of fifty Pounds of Tobacco was given for 
each Pound of Silk," according to Robert Beverley; 
and "all Persons were enjoin'd to plant Mulberry- 
Trees, for the food of the Silk -worm, according to 
the Number of Acres of Land they held." The 
industry thrived for a time, and a little silk is 
said to have been exported to England about the 
middle of that century. Some or all of the bounties 
were removed, at least for a time, in 1666, because 
the industry was considered to be well established; 
but tobacco was so much more profitable that it soon 
eclipsed every other crop. Robert Beverley, writing 
upon "The Present State of Virginia" in 1720, recalls 
"how formerly there was Incouragement given for 
making of Linen, Silk, etc., and how all Persons not 
performing several things towards producing of them 
were put under a Fine: But now all Incouragement 
of such things is taken away or intirely dropt by the 
Assemblies, and such Manufactures are always neg- 
lected when Tobacco bears anything of a Price." 

The efforts to grow silk in the New World did 
not stop with Virginia. With the founding of Caro- 
lina and Georgia the attempt was made with all the 
vigor which characterized the early experiments along 
the James River. In fact, the best conceived and 
most persistent scheme for silk -raising appears to have 
been that which was set on foot in Georgia. The 
designs of the trustees of the colony, as told 
by Stevens in his "History of Georgia," "comprised 


three points: to provide an asylum for the poor debtor 
and persecuted Protestant ; to erect a silk, wine, and 
drag -growing colony ; and to i-elieve the mother 
country of an overburdened population." It was 
estimated that the silks imported into England from 
Italian, French, Chinese and other sources, amounted 
to five hundred thousand pounds a year at the time 
of the colonization of Georgia, about 1732 to 1735. 
"With this Georgia will abundantly supply us," the 
account of the secretary of the trustees runs, "if we 
are not wanting to ourselves, and do not neglect the 
opportunity which Providence has thrown into our 
hands. The saving of this five hundred thousand 
pounds per annum is not all; but our supplying our- 
selves with raw silk from Georgia carries this further 
advantage along with it, that it will provide a new or 
additional employment for at least twenty thousand 
people in Georgia, for about four months in the year, 
during the silk season; and at least twenty thousand 
more of our poor here, all the year round, in working 
the raw silk, and preparing such manufactures as we 
send in return; or to purchase the said raw silk in 
Georgia, to which country our merchants will trade to 
much greater advantage than they can expect to do in 
Italy." The first colonial seal represented silk-worms 
upon one of its faces.* 

*Althoa8^ this seal is described in various histories, I have been unable to 
find a print of the side bearing the silk-worms. None is in the collection of 
Colonel Jones, the anthor of the history, nor of Otis Ashmore, an authority 
on the seals of Georgia. Mr. Ashmore published a history of all the seals of 
Georgia in the Morning News of Savannah, April 15, 1804. See, also, Jones' 
History of Georgia^ p. 97. It is probable that no impression of this side of 
the seal exists in this country, and it is presumed that Colonel Jones obtained 
his information concerning it from the British Colonial Office. Another seal 
was subsequently made. 


Sir Thomas Lombe, an eminent silk manufacturer in 
England, appears to have been the leading agitator of 
the silk industry for Georgia. Oglethorpe was thor- 
oughly convinced of the practicability of the industry. 
The trustees secured Italian silk -growers to accompany 
the colonists. Encouraging results were soon reached. 
Samples of raw silk began to be received in England. 
"In May, 1735," writes Jones in his "History of 
Georgia," "the trustees, accompanied by Sir Thomas 
Lombe, exhibited a specimen to the Queen, who desired 
that it should be wrought into a fabric. This was 
done, and Her Majesty was so much pleased with the 
manufactured silk that she ordered it to be made up 
into a costume, in which she appeared at Court on her 
birthday." In or about 1750, Pickering Robinson was 
sent from England to France for the purpose of in- 
specting the growing and manufacture of silk, and 
upon his return, the trustees of the colony despatched 
him to Georgia, upon a salary of one hundred pounds 
a year and an allowance of twenty -five pounds for a 
clerk, to assume charge of the silk industry. Oper- 
ations were begun at Savannah in 1751, and in order 
to encourage the growing of silk, the most exorbi- 
tant bounties were offered for cocoons. Despite all 
the forced and statutory encouragement, the silk in- 
dustry did not return the money expended upon it, 
although the annual production of the raw product 
reached many hundred pounds for a number of years. 
As tobacco had gained the supremacy in Virginia, so 
rice and cotton soon became the dominant industries 
in Georgia; the troubles with the mother country 
depressed the markets for silk, and after 1766 silk- 
growing rapidly declined. 


There was one apparent exception to this decay and 
unprofitableness of the silk industry, and this was 
among the Salzburgers, a settlement of German Prot- 
estants, who came to Georgia in 1734, and settled 
twenty-five miles above Savannah, at Ebenezer. 
Under the care of their pastor, John Martin Bolzins, 
the silk culture of the settlement attained to much 
prominence. "In 1736," writes Rev. P. A. Strobel, 
historian of the Salzburgers, "mulberry trees were 
planted at Ebenezer under the direction of Mr. 
Bolzius, and the Salzburgers were among the first 
and most successful in carrying out the wishes of 
the trustees in this particular. In 1742, five hundred 
trees were sent to Ebenezer, and a machine was 
erected for preparing the silk. In 1745 and 1746, 
specimens were sent to England, and in 1748, four 
hundred and sixty -four pounds were produced. In 
1749, the trustees authorized Mr. Bolzius to erect ten 
sheds and ten machines for reeling, and other means 
necessary to carry on the manufacture. In 1750, 
nearly all the colonists had abandoned the experiment 
of silk -raising, except the Salzburgers. They perse- 
vered, and every year became more skilled in the 
business, and in 1751, they sent over to England a 
thousand pounds of cocoons and seventy -four pounds 
two ounces of raw silk, yielding the handsome sum 
one hundred and ten pounds sterling, or upwards of 
five hundred dollars, the price being at that time 
thirty shillings per pound. * * * Many 

mulberry -trees are still [1855] standing at Ebenezer, 
which no doubt have sprung from the original stock ; 
and many of the descendants of the Salzburgers con- 
tinue to raise silk, which they manufacture into fish- 


ing-lines, and sell very readily in Savannah." These 
thrifty Germans continued the production of silk until 
the very eve of the Revolution. As late as 1772, they 
sent to England four hundred and eighty -five pounds 
of raw silk, and it is recorded that "some persons in 
almost every family there understand its process from 
the beginning to the end." 

But the doom of the southern silk industry, which 
had been portended by the rise of cotton and rice 
and other interests, as well as by restriction of 
climate, was finally set by the American Revolution. 
The trustees of the colony, according to Charles C. 
Jones, Jr., had "seriously misinterpreted" the agricul- 
tural capabilities of Georgia. "Although substantial 
encouragement had been afforded to Mr. Amatis, to 
Jacques Camuse [Italian silk -growers], to the Salz- 
burgers at Ebenezer, and to others ; although copper 
basins and reeling machines had been supplied and a 
filature erected ; although silk -worm eggs were pro- 
cured and mulberry trees multiplied, — silk culture in 
Georgia yielded only a harvest of disappointment." 

The center of activity in the silk industry was now 
transferred to the northward. About 1760, silk worm 
eggs and mulberry trees began to be planted in Con- 
necticut, and there soon arose in that state the most 
important — because the most nearly self-sustaining — 
silk -growing industry which has yet been seen in 
America. The industry was greatly encouraged by 
the writings of Jared Eliot, an able preacher and 
naturalist, whose memory is preserved to us, amongst 
other ways, in his excellent "Essays upon Field Hus- 
bandry," which appeared at sundry times from 1747 
to 1759. He lived from 1685 to 1763. He was 


grandson of the apostle Eliot. In 1762 he wrote 
"An Essay on the Invention or Art of Making 
very good Iron from black Sea Sand." Drake, in 
his "Dictionary of American Biography," says that 
Eliot "was the first to introduce the white mulberrj-- 
tree into Connecticut, and with it the silk -worm, and 
published a treatise upon the subject." Such a treatise 
is unknown to bibliogi'aphers, so far as I can learn. 
It is probably the sixth and last essay in Eliot's "Field 
Husbandry," published in 1759. I am the fortunate 
possessor of this rare and interesting work, but noth- 
ing is said in this particular essay about the original 
introduction of the mulberry into Connecticut. In 
fact, the essay speaks of the tree as being well known, 
and silk had been made in the colony. Eliot urges 
the growing of silk with much enthusiasm, and aside 
from the main object, he sees the following subsidiary 
advantages of planting mulberry trees : they may be 
planted in places which are not used for tilled crops; 
they produce fire wood, "which is much wanted in 
our old towns;" they may afford timber; "they are 
worth planting for Shade, Ornament and Beauty;" 
may be used for hedges ; they yield fruit, — "the white 
Mulberry Tree bears abundance more Fruit, than the 
black ; in Italy, where they abound in these Trees, 
they fatten their Swine and Poultry with the Fruit; 
the Writers say, that the Pork raised in this Manner, 
is exceeding good ; what is made by this Means costs 
nothing, for the Hogs are their own Carvers ; the 
Flesh raised this Way, is a clear Gain, like our Wood 
fed Pork. I apprehend that a better Improvement of 
the Fruit would be, to make artificial Wine ; what is 
now made in the Country is from Cherries, and Cur- 


rants; but, as the Fruit is sour, it requires a great deal 
of Sugar to make it good, which is an heavy Weight 
upon that Manufacture; but as the Juice of Mulberries 
is very sweet, especially the white Sort, I cannot but 
think, that from these, very good artificial Wine may 
be made, without any, or with very little Sugar ; what 
is Sweet has a spiritous Strength, in Proportion to 
the Degree of Sweetness ; Honey will make strong* 
Metheglin, and Molasses makes Rum." The mulberry 
may be made to afford groves, — "proper Places for 
Retirement, Study, and Meditation; this will have 
Weight with those who love Contemplation, those 
who are wise and good ; he that is not Company for 
himself, when alone, will be none of the most pleasing, 
or edifying Company for others." 

Eliot says that "The Society established at London, 
for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures, and 
Commerce," offered premiums for the production of 
silk in North America, and "pointed out Georgia, 
Pennsylvania, and Connecticut" as the most promising 
colonies in which the undertaking might be prosecuted. 
The Rev. Samuel Pullein's "Culture of Silk" for the 
"Use of the American Colonies," published in Lon- 
don in 1758, is a further evidence of the desire of the 
mother country to foster this new industry. 

Rev. Dr. Stiles, subsequently president of Yale 
College, was also early interested in promoting the 
raising of silk, and he aided in obtaining from the 
legislature an offer of a bounty of ten shillings for 
every hundred mulberry trees of three years' standing, 
and another of three pence per ounce for all raw silk 
produced in the colony. The production of silk was 
so great in Connecticut that for many years the valua- 


tion of it was from $100,000 to $200,000 per annum. 
Its production i>ersisted throughout the Revolution, 
and even into this century. The chief reason of the 
continuance of the business in Connecticut seems to 
have been that the silk was used almost wholly in 
domestic manufacture, and therefore did not need the 
English market to keep it alive.* 

In most or all of the eastern states silk cul- 
ture has been undertaken, particularly in the colonial 
period. Of the fabrics made of this silk, Mr. Brockett 
speaks as follows: "We find instances, occasionally, 
* * * of some delegate to the Colonial 

Assembly coming thither with a silk waistcoat or 
handkerchiefs made from silk of his own raising, 
and woven in his own house; or of some grand lady 
appearing at a reception of the Colonial Governor or 
in a public assembly, clad in a gown woven from 
native-grown silk. In either case, the fabrics were 
greatly praised; yet it must be confessed that, as 
compared with the silks of our own time, they were 
very imperfect goods, and would be scouted by our 
belles and beaux as unworthy to be worn." 

The ^^MuUicaulis Craze ^^ 

Although the interest in the growing of silk had 
greatly subsided before the close of the last century, 
it had not completely died out. Here and there a 
local interest survived, and carried over the memorj' 

*PerBon8 who are interested in the early ideas respecting the species of silk 
worms, should consult Moses Bartram's '^Observations on the Native Silk 
Worms of North America," 1768, published in Trans. Amer. Phil. Soc. i., 2nd 
ed. 294. 


of the old ambitious experiments and served as a stim- 
ulus to the inception of an enterprise which set the 
country aflame in the early part of the present century. 
In 1806, for example, Frederick Pursh, a botanical 
traveler, found mulberries cultivated in orchards near 
Cayuga Lake, N. Y., "may be for the raising of silk 
worms, as the trees were low and planted in regular 
close rows." The particular event which seems to have 
awakened general interest in this second silk enter- 
prise, was the report of the Committee on Agriculture 
of the House of Representatives, in 1826, respecting 
the imports of silks and the exports of bread stuffs. 
These imports were increasing with wonderful rapidity, 
while the exports were decreasing in like ratio. This 
committee took the matter up in pursuance of a reso- 
lution introduced into the House on the 29th of 
December, 1825, by Mr. Miner: ^^ Resolved, That the 
Committee on Agriculture be instructed to inquire 
whether the cultivation of the mulberry tree, and the 
breeding of silk worms, for the purpose of producing 
silk, be a subject worthy of legislative attention; and 
should they think it to be so, that they obtain such 
information as may be in their power, respecting the 
kind of mulberry tree most preferred, the best soil, 
climate, and mode of cultivation, and probable value 
of the culture, taking into view the capital employed, 
the labor, and the product, together with such facts 
and opinions as they may think useful and proper." 
The report of the Committee on Agriculture, made on 
the 2nd of the following May, contained a statement 
of the imports and exports of which I have spoken, 
and it requested that the Secretary of the Treasury 
"cause to be prepared a well -digested Manual" upon 


the culture of silk. This Manual was prepared under 
the direction of Secretary Richard Bush, and submitted 
to the Speaker on the 5th of February, 1828. It com- 
prises an illustrated volume of 220 pages. 

Silk culture was now agitated everywhere. Congress 
took it up time and again. The Senate published a 
treatise on the subject in August, 1828, by De Hazzi, 
Counsellor of State, Germany, who had been attracted 
by the resolutions of the House of Representatives. 
State legislatures considered the culture of silk. Public 
meetings of all sorts took up the refraiii, and it was 
echoed from housetop to housetop from Maine to the 
Gulf. The House of Representatives of Massachusetts 
had the question up in 1831, and it passed a resolution 
that "his Excellency the Governor be requested to 
cause to be compiled a concise Manual, to contain the 
best information respecting the growth of the Mulberry 
tree, with suitable directions for the culture of Silk, — 
and that this manual be distributed in suitable numbers 
in the city of Boston, and to every town in the Com- 
monwealth. — That to defray the expense thus incurred, 
he be authorized to draw his warrant on the treasury 
for a sum not exceeding six hundred dollars." Jonathan 
H. Cobb, of Dedham, who had had considerable success 
in making silk, was chosen to write the manual. 
The book quickly went to second and third editions. 
In the second edition, 1833, the author makes this 
explanation: "Since the publication of the former 
edition of this little work, the Legislature of Massa- 
chusets having further noticed it by ordering an addi- 
tional number of copies to be purchased for further 
distribution in the different towns of this Common- 
wealth; and the Congress of the United States hav- 


ing also resolved to purchase 2,000 copies for distri- 
bution in that honorable body ; the author has 
thought it his duty to enlarge the present edition 
by giving such further information as he could ob- 
tain * * *." A fourth edition was 
made in 1839. Other books appeared in various parts 
of the country. (See pages 155 to 158.) 

The wildest notions of the possibilities of this new 
silk culture were widespread, and took conservative 
men off their feet. I shall make an extract from 
Cobb's Manual in support of this statement; but 
before doing so I quote a contemporaneous account of 
Mr. Cobb's experiments, taken from the Boston "Mer- 
cantile Journal," to show that this author had really 
had a successful experience with silk -growing, and was 
able to speak with authority: "There is a gentleman 
in this vicinity, (Mr. Cobb, of Dedham,) who, for a 
shorter period, has perhaps been working as effectively 
as any other person in the way of experiment. He 
began the cultivation of the mulberry tree in 1826; and 
since that time, notwithstanding the nature of the soil, 
which is not the most favorable, has extended his 
operations so much as to be now in the habit of bring- 
ing to the Boston market American silk, manufactured, 
to the amount of about a hundred dollars a week, the 
year round." Projecting this experience at Dedham 
across the country at large, Mr. Cobb drew a picture 
which is vividly like the florid expectations of the first 
American silk advocates, exactly two centuries before: 

"Now taking the smallest estimate of income, and 
in what way can a farmer, remote from a seaport town, 
acquire so much, with so little capital and labor, in 
about five weeks' time! If any person will point out 


any way, and prove it, to the satisfaction of the Legis- 
lature or Agricultural Society, I think he would merit 
a great reward. But this business may be particularly 
recommended to overseers of the poor in every town, 
who have a farm — and every town ought to have one — 
to keep their paupers ; for if one -half their paupers 
are able to gather leaves and feed the worms five weeks, 
this business would support all of them a year, exclu- 
sive of the cost of an overseer. Permit me to suggest 
one consideration more, — if all the highways in country 
towns were ornamented with a row of mulberry trees, 
on each side, half a rod apart, each mile would con- 
tain 1380 trees, the income of which, after seven 
years, would probably pay for repairing all the high- 
ways and the expenses of the public schools, if the 
inhabitants would restrain their cattle and sheep from 
going at large. There is another method of producing 
silk from mulberry trees, one year after transplanting 
them; which is, to plant them in rows 3 feet by 
2 apart, which would give about 7000 to an acre, and 
every other year with a sharp instrument to cut them 
oflf within three or four inches of the ground, and 
feed them out or cut off every year. But whether this 
method will produce as much or more silk thai^ to 
omit picking the leaves for seven years, I have not 
obtained information suflEicient to decide. 

"I further remark, that the education of youth is 
of the utmost importance to the public. May I be 
permitted to address the inhabitants of every school 
district, that they would seriously and without delay, 
consider the importance of connecting the silk business 
with summer schools, by procuring two or three acres 
of suitable land near each school house, and have 


them well covered with mulberry trees and fenced with 
a mulberry hedge, with sheds near the school house, 
for feeding the worms and reeling the silk; and hav- 
ing a suitable mistress and twenty four scholars and 
over, to be employed in gathering leaves and feeding 
worms at times not interfering with regular school 
hours, for the term of four months, the silk worms 
to be hatched in succession, once in eight or ten days, 
and the produce of silk will be more than enough to 
pay the wages and board of the mistress at $20 per 
month, and the board of the scholars at $1 per week 
during that time. This can be proved by actual 
experiment and arithmetical demonstration, if we may 
believe the testimony of all the silk -growers and 
authors on the silk business. 

"A shed may be erected near a school house of the 
following dimensions; viz., 20 feet long and 16 wide, 
with nine feet posts, boarded with square edged 
boards, the roof shingled, but no floor, two small 
windows, one at each end ; two frames made like 
ladders for four tier of shelves fifteen feet long and 
four and a half wide, the lower ends of the ladders 
to be two and a half feet above the ground, and two 
and a half feet between them ; at one end of the shed 
four more shelves the height of the others, thirteen feet 
long, one foot and eight inches wide ; these twelve 
shelves will serve for one hundred thousand worms, 
and will consume about twenty five hundred pounds of 
leaves previous to their spinning cocoons, after each 
hatching, and produce two hundred and eight pounds 
of cocoons and make twenty six pounds of reeled silk, 
according to Messrs. Homergue's and Cobb's calcula- 
tions ; and by hatching the worms in succession for 


sixteen weeks, the second hatching in fourteen days 
after the first, and then in ten days, and then once in 
eight days, until there is ten hatchings, which at that 
rate will make two thousand and eighty pounds of 
cocoons, and two hundred and sixty pounds of reeled 
silk, which, at the lowest price that Mr. Cobb has sold 
his for, $4.50 per pound, amounts to $1,170, or selling 
the cocoons at 40 cents the price at Philadelphia, they 
would amount to $832 ; or say 25 cents, the lowest 
price offered anywhere, they amount to $520. Then, 
allowing the mistress $20 per month, and the board of 
the twenty four scholars for sixteen weeks, each at $1 
per week, it amounts to $464, which, deducted from 
$520, there remains $56 ; which allowing three acres of 
land and the trees to cost $600, the $56 will pay the 
interest of the money and $20 left to pay interest for 
two sheds which will be wanted if the silk is reeled ; 
thus you have the children schooled and boarded 
without any expense to their parents or the town, and 
interest on the capital in the bargain. What more do 
you want, but faith and resolution." 

The author recurs to his estimates of profits again 
and again. "Now, let a young man of 21 years 
of age, of steady habits," he advices, "purchase such 
an establishment, and mortgage it for security of 
the payment, and get it insured against fire and other 
casualities, and put the leaves out on shares, and work 
himself at some mechanical or agricultural employment, 
he would at the expiration of twenty years, if a tem- 
perate man, undoubtedly acquire double the property 
which the greater number of professional men attain 
to, who must have a large sum expended upon them 
previous to commencing business." 


Just at the time when the public began to feel the 
excitement of the new silk industry, a new element 
was added to the contagion, and there arose the 
wildest speculation which American agriculture has 
ever known. This was the introduction of the mul- 
ticaulis mulberry. Perrottet had introduced a new 
mulberry into France from the Philippines in 1824, 
the large leaves and rapid growth of which at once 
attracted the attention of all silk- growers. It turned 
out that this tree had come originally from China, 
and was thought to be the source of the famous 
Chinese silk. Perrottet called it Moms multicaulis, 
from its habit of branching or sprouting from the base. 
This tree reached America about 1826, and in 1830 or 
• 1831 it was introduced into Massachusetts by William 
Kenrick, author of the "New American Orchardist." 

The fame of the tree spread rapidly. The records 
of the next ten years read like fiction. Many nursery- 
men gave up all other business that they might grow 
the mulberry, and they realized several hundred per 
cent profit. The secret of the Chinese silk had been 
discovered, and every available acre from New Eng- 
land to the Gulf must be covered with the mulberry, 
and men must train their hands to the breeding of the 
worms and the spinning of silken threads ! One nur- 
seryman, who is still living, went to the West Indies, 
that he might grow hundreds of thousands of trees 
during the winter season, so great was the haste for 
plants. From the thinly settled parts of the West 
the planters came eager for trees at almost any price, 
and even in Maine the demand was great. Then 
came the reaction. The market was supplied and soon 
overstocked. A disease appeared. The winters of 


New England were too severe. One man near Hartford 
lost nearly ten thousand trees from cold. Men lost 
their fortunes ; and in 1839 the bubble burst. One 
man near Philadelphia sold 250,000 trees at one auction 
in the fall of that year. He realized 31 cents each, 
with a discount of 7% per cent for cash. His buyers 
were mostly from the West. The eastern men had 
grown cautious before this. Other dealers sold for 
much less, and many had thousands of trees left upon 
their hands. "The trees were sold, in some instances, 
for a few cents each, and thousands, if not millions, 
were never replanted after they had been taken out 
of the ground in the fall of 1839," runs a contem- 
porary account. So Moras multicaulis passed from 
sight, and the present generation knows nothing of 
it. No nurseryman in the North grows it. One of the 
last specimens in the East was cut down about twelve 
years ago. It stood on the old battle ground at Ger- 
mantown. Among others who went down as a result 
of this great collapse, was Jonathan H. Cobb, who in 
the meantime had assisted in the establishment of the 
Connecticut Silk Company, at Hartford. But his 
name must always stand amongst those enthusiastic 
and prophetic souls who contribute so much to the 
progress of the world. 

I cannot leave this exciting topic without quoting 
Brockett's stirring account of this speculation, which 
he very properly calls "The Moras multicaulis mania": 
"One after another of the experimenters in silk culture 
began to advocate the Moras multicaulis, and recom- 
mend their friends to cultivate the trees, and raise silk 
if they could ; but at all events to raise multicaulis 
trees. Grave doctors of medicine and doctors of divin- 


ity, men learned in the law, agriculturists, mechanics 
and merchants, and women as well as men, seemed to 
be infected with a strange frenzy in regard to this mul- 
berry tree. They met in solemn conclaves over bundles 
of Mortis muUicauUs twigs, discussing seriously the 
glorious time when, in the not distant future, every 
farm should be a nursery for the young trees, every 
house should have its cocooneries attached, its silk- 
worms of the bivoltine, trivoltine or polyvoltine breeds 
yielding two, three or four crops of cocoons per year. 
The farmers' wives and daughters, when not engaged 
in feeding the worms, were to reel the silk, and perhaps 
to spin and twist it, till silk should become as cheap 
as cotton, and every matron and maid rejoice in the 
possession of at least a dozen silk dresses. It does 
not clearly appear where and on what occasions they 
were to wear these dresses, while their whole time was 
to be occupied with the care of the silk-worms and 

"Gideon B. Smith, of Baltimore, is said to have 
owned the first multicaulis tree in the United States, 
which was planted in 1826 ; but Dr. Felix Pascalis, of 
New York, was the first to make known to the public 
the remarkably rapid growth and supposed excellent 
qualities of the tree ; and so may be said to have 
opened this Pandora's box, from which so many evils 
escaped. The excitement in regard to the Morus 
multicaulis grew steadily; slowly, indeed, at first, but 
increasing with a geometrical progression until 1839, 
when it culminated in utter ruin to the cultivators. 
The shrewdest and wariest operators, men who did not 
believe in its loudly heralded virtues, were fairly carried 
off their feet by the surging tide of speculation. The 


yonng trees or cuttings, which were sold in 1834 or 
1835 for $3 or $5 a hundred, came soon to be worth 
$25, $50, $100, $200, and even $500 a hundred. The 
writer well recollects being in Northampton in the 
spring of 1839, when Mr. Whitmarsh and Dr. Stebbins 
were rejoicing over the purchase of a dozen multicaulis 
cuttings, not more than two feet long and of the thick- 
ness of a pipe-stem, for $25. 'They are worth $60,' 
exclaimed the Doctor, in his enthusiasm. It is said 
that a florist and nurseryman, on Long Island, who was 
one of the first to introduce the tree into the country, 
though he had no particular faith in it, devised a plan 
for enhancing its price. He had sold small quantities 
to nurserymen in Providence and Newport, and several 
of the Massachusetts cities and large towns ; and one 
day, in 1835, while at work in his nursery, he deter- 
mined to make a bold push for a speculation. Hastily 
returning to his house and putting up a change of 
apparel, he mounted his sulky, drove into New York, 
and on board the Providence boat. Arriving at New- 
port, he landed, drove to the first nursery there, and 
asked, in an excited way, 'Have you any multicaulis 
trees!' 'A few,' was the reply. 'I will give you fifty 
cents apiece for all you have,' said the Long Islander. 
The nurseryman thought a moment. 'If,' he said to 

himself, 'Mr. is willing to give that price for 

them, it is because he knows they are worth more.' He 
raised his head. 'I don't think I want to sell what 

few I have, Mr. .' 'Very well,' was the reply; 

'I presume I can get them for that,' and he drove off. 
Every nurseryman who was known to have any trees in 
Newport, Providence, Worcester, Boston, or the towns 
adjacent, Springfield, Northampton, &c., was visited, 


the same offer made, and the same answer returned. 

'I came back,' said Mr. , 'without any trees; 

but you could not have bought multicaulis trees, in any 
of the towns I had visited, for a dollar apiece, although 
a week before they would have been fully satisfied to 
have obtained twenty-five cents apiece for them.' Yet 
this very man, shrewd as he was, was carried off his 
feet by the greatness of the demand which followed. 
He imported large quantities from France, multiplied 
his cuttings by all the devices known to his profession ; 
and at last, so enormous were his sales, that, in the 
winter of 1838-9, he sent an agent to France with 
$80,000 in hand, with orders to purchase one million or 
more trees, to be delivered in the summer and fall. 
Before the whole of his purchase had arrived, the crisis 
had come. The nurseryman had failed for so large a 
sum that he could never reckon up his indebtedness ; 
and the next spring his multicaulis trees were offered 
in vain to the neighboring farmers at a dollar a hun- 
dred, for pea -brush. 

"Another incident related of the speculation was, 
that after the crash came at the East, some of the 
largest holders of the trees, in their desire to get them 
off their hands, chartered a vessel notoriously un- 
sea worthy, loaded her with the multicaulis shrubs, and 
sent the cargo by way of New Orleans to Indiana, 
insuring it in one of the marine companies at a high 
price. Greatly to their disappointment the vessel 
reached New Orleans safely, and the cargo was trans- 
shipped at an enormous expense to river boats, and 
when the trees reached Indiana they found no one who 
was willing to take them as a gift. This discreditable 
adventure cost the shippers a large sum of money. 


"The times were rife with speculation. The great 
panic and disaster of 1837 had thrown to the surface 
many restless, unscrupulous spirits, who were willing 
to embark in any enterprise, however daring or doubt- 
ful its character, which seemed to promise the slightest 
opportunity of regaining the fortunes they had lost. 
Numbers of these plunged into the multicaulis specu- 
lation, and made it more disastrous in its results than 
it otherwise would have been ; but there is this ground 
of consolation in regard to them, that not one of them 
escaped the ruin they helped to bring upon others." 

I will transcribe even another account of this wild 
speculation, in order that the reader may see this 
curious chapter in our history as understood by different 
students. The following is extracted from a paper 
on "The Silk Industry in the United States from 
1766 to 1874," by A. T. Lilly, contained in a bulletin 
of the "National Association of Wool Manufacturers," 
1875. Mr. Lilly speaks of this speculation as the 
"multicaulis fever," and then continues: "Haste to 
be rich led the way. Instead of the old method of 
planting mulberry orchards with the well-known and 
hardy varieties of the tree, the system was adopted of 
securing from trees of a single season's growth leaves 
fit for feeding. For this purpose, planting in close 
hills or in hedges was necessary, and the Morris multi- 
caulis was the favorite tree. Its luxuriant growth, 
when stimulated, was indeed remarkable. Its leaves, 
fed to the worm, produced a silk that was not equal 
in quality to that from the white mulberry. The trees 
had to be housed in winter, either in cellars or in 
earth -vaults. Notwithstanding the objections to it, 
the multicaulis grew rapidly in popular favor. Rarely 


was a garden or a cultivated spot to be seen without 
this tree. A demand for the trees themselves sprung 
up,— a demand that gave them an absurd and fac- 
titious value. Prices ranged, for trees produced from 
one bud or cutting, and of a single season's growth, 
from five cents to ten, twenty, fifty cents, one dollar, 
and in some instances five dollars apiece. The value 
of trees became greater than that of the silk that 
could be obtained by them; the trees were worth too 
much to be used for silk culture, and the raising of 
these trees became a speculative business of great 
activity. The excitement reached its culminating point 
in 1839, when the fortunes of many thrifty men who 
had embarked in the enterprise were wrecked in bank- 
ruptcy. Even then, although the failure of the multi- 
caulis was assured, the mania for raising mulberry - 
trees was not abated, hardier varieties being its objects. 
The writer was witness to an instance of the height to 
which this excitement carried prices, and places the 
facts here as a matter of record. Two trees of one 
season's growth, raised by Elder Sharp, of North 
Windham, Conn., were sold, standing in his nursery, 
in August, 1842, after due advertisement, at auction. 
The first one offered brought $106, the second $100; 
and further sales were withheld because the bidding 
was not considered as sufficiently spirited. Disaster 
followed this baseless speculation, as might have been 
anticipated, when the price of the trees exceeded the 
worth of. the product ; and in 1843-44 the fabric of 
artificial values collapsed. A deep reaction in popular 
feeling took the place of the former excitement ; and 
the whole business of silk culture sank into disfavor, 
along with the costly and now neglected mulberry -trees. 

LITERATURE OP 1825 TO 1844 155 

A blighfc' of a general character, to which even the 
hardy white mulberry yielded at last, gave the finishing 
blow, and silk culture in America ceased to exist." 

Some interest in the multicaulis mulberry and in 
silk-growing lingered on after the crash came in 1839, 
but the hard winter of 1844 wiped out the industry, 
and the second great epoch of silk -farming in America 
came to an end. This second epoch may be said to 
have reached from 1825 to 1844. A large special 
literature sprung up in these twenty years. To show 
something of the extent of this literature, I note be- 
low the titles of the books of this period which are 
in my own library at this writing : 

American Silk Grower, The ; and Farmer's Manual. A new 
monthly publication, designed to extend and encourage the 
growth of silk throughout the United States. Edited by Ward 
Cheney & Brothers, Burlington, N. J. Philadelphia: Published 
by Charles Alexander. No. 6 (vol. i.), Dec, 1838; No. 7, 
Jan., 1839; No. 9, March, 1839; No. 10, April, 1839. Pp. 24 
in each issue. 

Clapp, Aaron. An Experiment on the Morus multicaulis, with 
Directions for Preserving Silk Worms' Eggs, and Feeding Silk 
Worms, and twenty receipts for making cheap dyes for coloring 
sewing silks. With a supplement containing extracts from 
various authors in relation to the profit of raising silk. Hart- 
ford: Printed by Case, Tiffany & Co. Copyr. 1839. 1839.* 
Illustr. Pp. 72. 

Clarke, John. Treatise on the Mulberry Tree and Silkworm. 
And on the Production and Manufacture of Silk. Second 
edition. Philadelphia: Thomas, Co wperthwait & Co. Copyr. 
1839. 1839. Illustr. Pp. 363. 

Cobb, J. H. A Manual Containing Information Respecting the 
Growth of the Mulberry Tree, with Suitable Directions for the 
Culture of Silk. In three parts. Boston: Carter, Hendee & 
Co. 1831. Illustr. Pp. 68. 

*Date of imprint, or title-pase. 


. The same. New edition. 1833. Pp. 98. 

. The same. (Bound with Essays on American Silk, by 

John d'Homergue and Peter Stephen Du ponceau, and A Prac- 
tical Treatise on the Culture of Silk, by F. G. Comstock.) 

. The same. Fourth edition, enlarged. Boston: Weeks, 

Jordan & Co. Copyr. 1839. 1839. Illustr. Pp. 162. 

Comstock, F. G. A Practical Treatise on the Culture of Silk, 
adapted to the soil and climate of the United States. Hart- 
ford: Wm. G. Comstock. Copyr. 1836. 1836. Illustr. Pp. 

. The same. (Bound with Essays on American Silk, by 

John d'Homergue and Peter Stephen Duponceau, and A Man- 
ual containing Information respecting the Growth of the Mul- 
berry Tree, by J. H. Cobb.) 

Dennis, Jonathan, Jr. Dennis' Silk Manual: Containing com- 
plete directions for cultivating the different kinds of mulberry 
trees, feeding silk worms, and manufacturing silk to profit, 
adapted to the wants of the American cultivator, and believed 
to contain more practical information than any similar work 
now before the public. With a supplement of extracts from 
various authors in relation to the profit of raising silk. In 
three parts. New York: Mahlon Day & Co. Copyr. 1839. 
1839. Illustr. Pp. 107. 

D'HoMERGUE, John, and Duponceau, Peter Stephen. Essays on 
American Silk, and the best means of rendering it a source of 
individual and national wealth. With directions to farmers 
for raising silk worms. Philadelphia: John Grigg. Copyr. 
1830. 1830. Illustr. Pp. 120. 

. The same. (Bound with a Practical Treatise on the Cul- 
ture of Silk, by F. G. Comstock, and A Manual containing 
Information respecting the Growth of the Mulberry Tree, by 
J. H. Cobb.) 

Fessenden's Practical Farmer and Silk Manual. Devoted to 
Agriculture, Rural Economy, and the Culture of Silk. T. G. 
Fessenden, editor. Boston: Puplished Monthly, by George 
C. Barrett. Vol. i., May 1835 to April 1836. Pp. 192. Vol. 
ii.. May 1836 to April 1837. Pp. 192. 


Hazzi, de (Count von). A Treatise on the Culture of Silk in 
Germany y and especially in Bavaria: or, Complete Instruction 
for the Plantation and the Management of Mulberry Trees, and 
the Bearing of Silkworms. Washington : " Printed by order of 
the Senate of the United States." 1828. Illustr. Pp. 106. 
Transmitted to Congress by James Mease. 

[JuLiEN, Stanislas.] Summary of the Principal Chinese Trea- 
tises upon the Culture of the Mulberry and the Bearing of Silk 
Worms. Translated from the Chinese. Washington : Peter 
Force. Copyr. 1838. 1838. Illustr. Pp. 198. 

l^ This ^ Summary ' was first translated from the Chinese by 
Stanislas Julien, member of the French Institute, and Professor 
of Chinese Literature, in the College of France, and printed at 
the Boyal Press, in Paris, by order of the Minister of Public 
Works, Agriculture, and Commerce. The French copy from 
which this translation was made, was transmitted from Paris, 
to the Secretary of State, and by his recommendation has been 
translated and published here."— A^o^e by the Publisher.'] 

Kenrick, William. The American Silk Grower^s Guide; or, The 
Art of Raising the Mulberry and Silk on the System of Succes- 
sive Crops in each Season. Boston: George C. Barrett and 
Bussell, Idiome & Co. Copyr. 1835. 1835. Pp. 111. 

. The same. Second edition, enlarged and improved. 

Boston: Weeks, Jordan & Co. Copyr. 1839. Illustr. Pp.167. 

Lardner, Rev. Dionybius. A Treatise on the Origin, Progres- 
sive Improvement, and Present State of the Silk Manufacture. 
Philadelphia: Carey & Lea. 1832. Illustr. Pp. 276. (One 
of the Cabinet Cyolopeedia Series.) 

MoRiN, M. The Silk Raiser's Manual; or. The Art of Raising 
and Feeding Silk Worms and of Cultivating the Mulberry Tree. 
Boston: Marsh, Capen & Lyon. Copyr. 1836. 1836. Illustr. 
Pp. 128. 

Pascalis, Felix. Practical Instructions and Directions for Silk- 
worm Nurseries, and for the Culture of the Mulberry Tree. 
Vol. i. New York : William B. Gilley. 1829. Illustr. Pp. 


Roberts, Edward P. A Manual, containing Directions for Sow- 
ing, Transplanting and Raising the Mulberry Tree; together 
with proper Instructions for Propagating the Same by Cuttings, 
Layers, &c., &c. As also. Instructions for the Culture of 
Silk : to which is added, Calculations Shewing the Produce and 
probable Expense of Cultivating of from one to ten Acres, as 
tested by actual Results. Third edition, with improvements 
and additions. Baltimore: Samuel Sands. 1838. Pp. 100. 

Rush, Richard, Compiler. Growth and Manufacture of Silk, 
adapted to the different parts of the Union. February 7, 1828, 
Referred to the Committee on Agriculture. Doc. No. 158, Ho. 
of Reps., 20th Congress, 1st session. Washington: 1828. 
Illustr. Pp. 220. 

Silk Question Settled, The. The Testimony of One Hundred 
and Fifty Witnesses. Report of the Proceedings of the National 
Convention of Silk Growers and Silk Manufacturers, held in 
New York, Oct. 13th and 14th, 1843. Published under direction 
of the American Institute. Second edition, with additions. 
Boston: Printed by T. R. Marvin. 1844. Pp. 80. 

Vernon, William H. A Methodical Treatise on the Cultivation 
of the Mulberry Tree, on the Raising of Silk Worms, and on 
Winding the Silk from the Cocoons. United to an accurate 
description of the Winding Mill. With plates. Abridged from 
the French of M. De la Brousse: with Notes and an Appendix. 
Boston: Billiard, Gray & Co. Copyr. 1828. 1828. Illustr. 
Pp. 174. 

Whitharsh, Samuel. Eight Years' Experience and Observation 
in the Culture of the Mulberry Tree, and in the Care of the 
Silk Worm. With remarks adapted to the American system of 
producing raw silk for exportation. Northampton: J. H. 
Butler. Copyr. 1839. 1839. Illustr. Pp. 156. 

An Account of the Mulberries 

There is now practically no effort to grow silk in 
North America upon a commercial scale. The restric- 
tions of climate, the greater certainty of many other 


crops, the opening of trade directly with China and 
Japan, the cheaper labor of Prance and Italy, — all these 
factors have made the business precarious and unprofit- 
able. "This branch of industry," writes the botanist- 
traveler, Michaux, early in this century, "is adapted 
only to a populous country, where there are hands not 
required for the cultivation of the earth that may be 
employed in manufactures so as to afford their products 
at moderate prices. In the United States this period is 
still remote." Yet the persistent experiments to grow 
silk have been productive of good results, aside from 
teaching us what the limitations of our country are. 
A very large silk -manufacturing industry has arisen, 
the fabrics being made from imported raw silks. The 
net annual value of the finished goods of American 
manufacture is about seventy million dollars, and the 
annual imports of raw silks reach about six million 

But there is another curious development of all 
this early experiment, the history and evolution of 
which had never been traced until the present writer 
made the attempt in an experiment station bulletin a 
few years ago.* This second outcome is the evolution 
of the mulberry itself, and this is the theme which 
forms the proper subject and conclusion of all this dis- 
cussion of American silk-growing. Historians have 
followed the course of the development of the silk 
industry, but have neglected the subsequent course of 
the mulberry, upon which all the efforts at silk produc- 
tion have rested. The reasons for this oversight are 
the comparative unimportance of the mulberry for any 

*Malberrle8, Ball. 46. Cornell Exp. Sta. (November. 1892). 


other use than the feeding of silk worms, and the 
botanical perplexities of the genus Morus, to which 
these trees belong. 

For two or three centuries the earth has been 
searched for new forms of mulberry trees for the feed- 
ing of the silk worm. All the best types have been 
found to be forms of the white mulberry {Morus alha) 
of China, or types which are evidently direct offshoots 
of it. This type of mulberry trees produces fruit of 
inferior quality, and little effort has been made to 
develop fruit-bearing varieties of it. The fruit- 
bearing mulberry of history is another species, the 
black mulberry {Morus nigra) , probably a native of 
Persia and adjacent regions. But there has been very 
little desire for the introduction of a fruit -bearing mul- 
berry in this country, so that the black mulberry is 
little known here, although horticultural writers have 
generally referred any valuable fruit -bearing mulberry 
which has chanced to appear in this country to Moms 
nigra, because this is the species described in the Euro- 
pean fruit -books. A third important factor in the 
evolution of American mulberries is the i*e- introduction 
in recent years of the Morus Tatarica, now generally 
known in this country as the Russian mulberry, and 
which is really only an outlying form of the white 

A fourth important factor is the native red or 
purple mulberry {Morus rubra, Figs. 20, 21), and to 
this we need to give special attention in this explora- 
tion of the evolution of our native fruits. The species 
is greatly variable, and it grows naturally from west- 
ern New England and Long Island to Florida and 
Kansas and Texas. It is mentioned by very many of 




the early adventarers and narrators of the colonization 
and colonial periods of the country, and it was often 
nsed as a food for the silk worm. It appears to have 
beeo originally found in the Massachusetts Bay region, 
for Franeis Higginsou speaks of "mulberries," amongst 

tenlml New York. 

other wild fruits, in his "New-England's Plantation," 
published in 1630 [ but it is not now indigenous to that 
region. William Straehey, who was in Virginia about 
1610 to 1612, and wrote a "Historic of Travaile into 
Virginia Britannia," says that the Indians were familiar 
with the treer "By their dwellings are some great 
mulberrye trees, and these in some parte of the country 
ore found growing naturally in pretty groves: there 
was an assay made to make silke, and surely the 


wormes prospered excellently well untill the master 
workeraan fell sick, during which tyme they were eaten 
with ratts, and this willbe a commoditie not meanely 
profitable. Now yt is seriously considered of, and 
order taken that yt shalbe duly followed." A part of 
this statement, in the identical words, is found in John 
Smith's earlier account of the natural productions of 
Virginia. The tree was early spread widely in the 
settlements. In 1749, Peter Kalm found it planted at 
Montreal, where it had been brought some twenty 
years before, but the most northerly place at which he 
knew it to grow naturally was ^' about twenty English 
miles north of Albany." It was early introduced into 

Although this red mulberry was early planted in 
cultivated grounds, no attempt appears to have been 
made to improve its fruit. Michaux speaks of it early 
in this century as follows: "The fruit * * * * 
might easily be augmented in size and quantity by 
careful cultivation : a very sensible improvement is 
witnessed in trees left standing in cultivated fields." 
William Prince, writing in his "Treatise on Horticul- 
ture," in 1828, speaks of the "Red American, a com- 
mon native of our forests," as one of the "most 
valued" mulberries "for their fruit," but he knew no 
named varieties. The Congressional Manual of 1828 
gives a good account of the distribution and attributes 
of the native red mulberry. "There are several varie- 
ties in the red mulberry tree," it says, "depending on 
the leaves and fruit : 

"1. Leaves all orbiculated (round). 

"2. do deeply lobed. 

"3. do with three short lobes. 


"4. Fruit, berries nearly white. 

"5. Fruit, berries blueish purple. 

"6. do do red and long. 

"7. do do blackish red." 

Up to this time, no distinct domestic variety of the 
red mulberry had been introduced. Yet it is a signifi- 
cant fact that the first -named variety of mulberry 
originating in this country is an offspring of this wild 
Morus rubra, and not an offshoot of the many foreign 
types which had been introduced here. This variety 
is the Johnson. The first mention of it, so far as I 
know, is in the first edition of Downing's "Fruits and 
Fruit Trees," in 1845. 

Four well-marked named varieties of this red mul- 
berry have appeared in cultivation, — the Johnson, 
Hicks, Stubbs, and Lampasas, the first three named 
for persons who were instrumental in introducing 
them to the public. They are all chance varieties found 
in the woods or wild places. If the mulberry were a 
fruit of great importance, numbers of distinct varieties 
would no doubt soon be bred from this native mulberry 
stock. In the original edition of A. J. Downing's 
"Fruits and Fruit Trees," 1845, it is said that the 
variety known as Johnson has been "lately received 
from Professor Kirtland, of Cleveland, one of the most 
intelligent horticulturists in the country ; " and it is 
distinctly stated that it is a form of our native species. 
Charles Downing reaflfirms this latter statement in 
Purdy's "Fruit Recorder," in 1872, and in comparing 
the fruit with that of the wild Morus rubra, says that 
it is "of about the same quality, but of larger size." 
In the second revision of "Fniits and Fruit Trees," 
1872, by Charles Downing, it is described as follows: 


"A seedling from Ohio. Fruit very large, oblong 
eylindric; blackish color, subacid, and of mild, agree- 
able flavor. Growth of the wood strong and irregular. 
Leaves uncommonly large." The Johnson is very little 
known at the present time, and will probably soon pass 
from sight. Mr. Berckmans, of Georgia, writes that 
the "fruit is large, very good, but too little of it," and 
that he has "long since discarded it." "The fruit," 
he says "is fully two inches long by three -fourths inch 
in diameter, very black and of a rich, vinous flavor." 

The Hicks (or Hicks' Everbearing) is a Georgian 
variety, as near as I can learn, although Downing, in 
1872, credits it to Kentucky. It was brought to notice 
about 1830, or before, by Sirari Rose, of Macon, 
Georgia, who is said to have obtained it from Thomas 
Elkins, of Effingham county, Georgia. Mr. Elkins 
"planted it in avenues, on his lanes, in his fence 
corners, and many other favorite places on his plan- 
tation, for his hogs, and it is said that he always had 
pork or bacon to sell." At the present time it is much 
used in parts of the South as a food for swine. Mr. 
Berckmans says that "the value of mulberries as an 
economic food for hogs is beginning to be appreciated 
by many farmers, who have planted large orchards of 
the Hicks for that purpose." It is also one of the very 
best varieties for poultry. It is a most profuse bearer, 
producing a continuous and bountiful crop for three 
and four months. The fruit is medium to large, very 
sweet, and rather insipid. 

The original Stubbs mulberry tree was found grow- 
ing in a wood near Dublin, Laurens county, Georgia. 
Col. John M. Stubbs, of that place, gave cions to Mr. 
Berckmans some twenty years ago, and Mr. BerckraanB 


introduced it to the public. It .is probably the most 
productive of all mulberries, even exceeding the wonder- 
ful prolificacy of the Hicks. The fruit is deep black, 
with a very rich, subacid, vinous flavor. It is fully 
two inches long and over a quarter as thick in well- 
developed specimens. 

The Lampasas variety was found in the woods in 
Lampasas county, Texas, by F. M. Ramsey, and was 
introduced in 1889 by T. V. Munson, of Deuison, 
Texas. It has a somewhat spreading and shrub -like 
habit. Mr. Munson writes of it: "The Lampasas 
mulberry, although a native of the region only 200 
miles southwest of here, is so tender here as to winter- 
kill. I have ceased to propagate it on that account. 
I have never been able to fruit it." This variety is 
interesting to the botanist because it belongs to the 
pubescent -leaved type of the mulbeiTy, to which 
Rafinesque gave the name Moras iomentosa in his 
monograph of North American mulberry trees, and 
which Bureau, a more recent monographer, called 
Moms rubra var. iomentosa. 

The Mexican mulberry {Moms celtidifolia) , which 
reaches as far north as Texas, New Mexico and Arizona, 
"in the countries south of the United States is fre- 
quently planted as a fruit-tree," writes Sargent, in his 
great "Silva," quoting from Kunth, "although the 
fruit which it produces is inferior in size and flavor to 
that of the red and black mulberry trees." This and 
the common red mulberry are the only species native 
to the United States. 

We must now enquire if the foreign types of mul- 
berry trees, which were early introduced for the 
feeding of silk worms, have given any fruit-bearing 


varieties of importance ; for although these trees are 
somewhat foreign to the purpose of a book upon native 
fruits, we may find their evolution to be so interesting 
that we cannot forego the pleasure of an acquaintance- 
ship with them. We have already learned that the 
fruit -bearing mulberry of the Old World, and therefore 
of history, is the black {Moms nigra), and that our 
own cultivated varieties have been assumed to belong 
to it. As a matter of fact, however, it is very little 
known in America. It is not hardy, except in pro- 
tected places, in New England and New York. The 
Black Persian mulberry of the South and of California 
is undoubtedly this species. This variety, with others, 
w^as inserted in the fruit catalogue of the American 
Poraological Society for 1875. It was dropped from 
the catalogue in 1883, and has not been inserted since. 
It is named in Wickson^s "California Fruits," 1889, 
without particular comment. The same volume also 
mentions the black mulberry of Spain, as having been 
fruited by Felix Gillet, of Nevada City, California. 
This I take to be Moms nigra. There must be large 
regions in this country which are congenial to the true 
black mulberry, and it is strange that it is so little 
known. The fruit of this species is much larger than 
that of any other, and it possesses an agreeable subacid 
flavor. The fruits of the white mulberry {Moms alba)^ 
however, are often too sweet for most tastes when 
fully ripe, and in such case they should be picked 
before they have fully matured. 

We have seen that the multicaulis mulberry quickly 
passed from sight after the speculative collapse of 1839 
and the hard winter of 1844. Yet one record of the 
old contagion is left to us in the Downing mulberry 


(Fig. 22). Thia originated at Newburgh on the Hud- 
sou, from seeds sowu about 1846 by Charles Downing, 
one of the brothers who have become household com- 
panions to every American fruit-grower. It was 
noticed by the late C. M. Hovey in his "Magazine of 
Horticulture," in March, 1858, as "a new seedling 
raised by C. Downing, of Newburgh, N.Y., from the 
Morus mitUkaHlis." The Downing often looks very 
different from the old multicaulis, and I have some- 
times doubted if its history is correct ; but there is 
probably no mistake as to its origin. For many yeai-s 
the Downing was the leading fruit-bearing mulberrj-, 
but it pi-oved to be short-lived, and was often injured 
by the winters in the northern states ; and even as far 
south as Texas it frequently suffers from the cold. In 
Florida and other parts of the South it is still some- 
what grown, particularly as cuttings 
upon which to graft varieties which 
root less freely. Yet the nurserymen 
everywhere still sell the Downing mul- 
berry ; but it turns out, upon inves- 
tigation, that the Downing which they 
sell is not the variety originated by 
the Downings. In fact, it is not even 
Moms mulficaulis! The variety which, 
in good faith, they sell for Downing is 
really a form of Morus alba, the species 
which elsewhere in the world is grown 
ufttursi Hie. ^^Yy for the silk-worm or for orna- 
ment! With the gradual passing out of the Down- 
ing has come the gradual usurpation of the name 
and the good-will by a variety of the other species, 
and no man has recorded the transfer ; and now the 


true Downing is all but lost to cultivation, and the 
false variety is gaining in reputation. It is an excel- 
lent illustration of the operation of the stiniggle for 
existence, and tlie better has survived ; but the wonder 
is that such a striking transformation could take place 
before our very eyes and we see it not ! 

The variety whi(^h, in the North, is sold as Down- 
ing, is really the New American. This variety was 
brought to notice about 1854, by N. H. Lindley, of 
Bridgeport, Connecticut. No one knows its history, 
but it is undoubtedly a chance seedling of one of the 
old silk -worm mulberries. Two other varieties, the 
Trowbridge and Thorburn, are almost indistinguishable 
from it, and of these the history is also unknown ; but 
they are forms of Morns (tlha. The Russian mulberry 
type has also given us large -fruited varieties within 
recent years. Two of these which have received 
names are Ramsey White and Victoria. A Japanese 
mulberry, too (Morus Japonica), has been introduced, 
but it has not yet given us important fruit -bearing 

It will thus be seen that our cultivated mulberry 
flora, although small, is yet delightfully confused ; but 
the confusion, when once understood, is found to be 
the result of a curious evolution, in the course of which 
the old-time fruit -bearing mulberry has lost its promi- 
nence, the native mulberry has come to the fore, the 
epoch-making multicaulis, introduced for silk, came to 
be grown for its fruit, and its best fruit -producing 
variety has been driven out by a variety of another 
species which has heretofore been grown only for 
silk ; and the entire transformation has been wrought 
by intelligent men who were ignorant of it I 




The early records mention plums nearly as fre- 
quently as they speak of grapes. In fact, the abun- 
dance of many kinds of wild fruits made a great 
impression upon all the settlers of America, from the 
valley of the St. Lawrence to Georgia. The wild 
plum tree was seen and admired by Jacques Cartier, 
upon his visit to the St. Lawrence River in 1535. In 
the preliminary reconnoissance of the Cape Cod region, 
various fruit plants were encountered. Bradford and 
Winslow, in their journal, speak of "vines everywhere, 
cherry trees, plum trees, and many others which we 
know not." Edward Winslow writes to a friend in 
England in 1621, from Plymouth, of "grapes, white and 
red, and very sweet and strong also ; strawberries, 
gooseberries, raspas, &c.; plums of three sorts, white 
black, and red, being almost as good as a damson." 
Francis Higginson, in his " New-Englands Plantation," 
1630, mentions the following amongst the natural 
productions of the country: "Mulberries, Plums, 
Raspberries, Corrance, Chesnuts, Filberds, Walnuts, 
Sraalnuts, Hurtleberries and Hawes of White-thorne 
neere as good as our Cherries in England, they grow 
in plentie here." Thomas Morton, in his "New English 
Canaan," 1632, makes the following reference: "Plum- 
trees, of this kind there are many ; some that beare 



fruit as bigg as our ordinary bullis : others there 
be, that doe beare fruite much bigger than peare 
plummes, their colour red, and their stones flat, very 
delitious in taste." William Wood gives a more 
explicit account of the wild cherries and plums, in 
his "New England's Prospect," published in 1634: 
" The Cherrie trees yeeld great store of Cherries which 
grow on clusters like grapes ; they be much smaller 
than our English Cherrie, nothing neare so good if 
they be not fully ripe, they so furre the mouth that 
the tongue will cleave to the roofe, and the throate 
wax hoarse with swallowing those red Bullies (as 
I may call them) being little better in taste. Eng- 
lish ordering may bring them to be an English 
cherrie, but yet they are as wilde as the Indians. 
The Plummes of the Countrey be better for Plumbs 
than the Cherries be for Cherries ; they be blacke 
and yellow, about the bignesse of a Damson, of a 
reasonable good taste." 

Wood's cherry is instantly recognized as the choke 
cherry, and it is probable that this is the species 
which the other writers had in mind, although it is 
possible that the sand cherry or even the beach plum 
may have attracted their attention and have been rec- 
ognized as cherries. Their plum is undoubtedly the 
common native wild plum, which has a wide range 
from New England westward and southward. It is not 
plain, however, what the white plum of Winslow may 
have been. Alexander Young, in his "Chronicles of 
the Pilgrim Fathers," says that in the original edi- 
tion of Winslow, published in London in 1622, the 
word "white" occurred as "with," which he calls "an 
error of the press;" but inasmuch as there is no white 


plnm, it is possible that the original printing is cor- 
rect, although if "white" be omitted, there remain only 
two of the "three sorts" of plums, — the black and the 
red. If white was intended, it is probable that the 
writer had in mind fruits which are light -colored from 
the presence of a heavj- "bloom." But it is evident that 
these running observations ftinst not be translated too 
exactly. It is enough to know that the settlers found 
plums of eatable quality. 

Captain John Smith was attracted by the wild 
plums when he first went to Virginia. "Plumbs there 
are of 3 sorts," he says. "The red and white are like 
our hedge plumbs : but the other, which they call 
PutchaminSj grow as high as a Palmeta. The fruit is 
like a medler ; it is first greene, then yellow, and red 
when it is ripe : if it be not ripe it will drawe a 
mans mouth awrie with much torment ; but when it 
is ripe, it is as delicious as an Apricock." The reader 
will instantly recognize this last plum as the persim- 
mon ; and the word " putchamin" is no doubt a pho- 
netic rendering of the Indian word from which the 
word persimmon is derived. Strachey, writing some 
four or five years latei^ (that is, sometime from 1610 
to 1612), also speaks of a "plomb which they call 
pessemmins," and he likens it to a medlar and an 
apricot, no doubt in imitation of Smith. Strachey 
also says : "They have cherries, much like a dam- 
oizln, but for tl>eir tast and cullour we called them 
cherries ; and a plomb there is. Somewhat fairer than 
a cherrie, of the same relish, then which are seldome 
a better eaten." I suppose that the cherry to which 
Strachey refers is the Chickasaw plum, which grows 
abundantly in that region, and which is even now 


called "mountain cherry" in parts of Maryland and 
Virginia. John Smith's language is very similar, and 
it is probably the source of Strachey's information: 
"They have cherries, and those are much like a Dam- 
sen ; but for their tastes and colour, we called them 
Cherries." The other plum mentioned by Strachey is 
probably a form of Prunus Americana, or possibly 
some large -fruited form of the Chickasaw plum. 

The Native Plums in General 

It is not my purpose to make an inquiry into the 
early records of wild plums, but merely to mention 
the fact that the colonists were attracted by the fruit, 
and that they seemed to think it worthy of improve- 
ment. This improvement did not develop,' however, 
until the present century, and even then it was not 
the outcome of any direct effort at a definite object, 
but only the aggregate result of bringing together 
such wild or chance varieties as attracted the attention 
of lovers of fruit. It is interesting to notice, also, 
that these varieties originated or were discovered in 
parts of the country which were being newly settled. 
The great territory of New England, New York, Penn- 
sylvania and Michigan has never produced a variety of 
native plums which has been named and attained 
to any prominence. This is partly due to the fact 
that the wild plums of this great region, while of the 
same species as those in the upper Mississippi valley, 
are less prolific of large -fruited forms than those 
farther west. It is chiefly due, however, to the cir- 
cumstance that the European plum thrives admira- 
bly in this geographical region, and there was, there- 


fore, little need of giving any attention to the inferior 
natives ; and at the present time the fruit-growers 
of the East care little for and know less of these 
native fruits. The European plums thrive so well 
in these states and adjacent territorj- that they have 
become spontaneous along roadsides and in copses in 
many places, where they bear an annual abundance 
of little fruits which are commonly called damsons, 
and which are gathered for use in making conserves. 
Even as early as 1663, John Josselyn writes as 
follows of some of the fruits of New England : 
"The Quinces, Cherries, Damsons, set the Dames 
a work, Marmalad and preserved Damsons is to be 
met with in every house. It was not long before 
I left the Countrey that I made Cherry wine, and 
so may others, for there are good store of them both 
red and black." 

In Virginia and southward, however, the European 
plum does not thrive so well, and the inhabitants of 
those regions, previous to the present generation, have 
not been noted for their attention to horticultural 
industries. The result has been that no plum indus- 
try has developed in the South until very recently. 
Yet the wild plums have long been gathered and 
employed in domestic uses, as, indeed, they have in 
thinly settled portions of Ontario and other parts of 
the northwestern territory. But it appears to have 
been chiefly in the newly settled regions, as I have 
said, that these large -fruited native plums have been 
sorted out and named. The settlers often suffered for 
lack of fruit, and were, therefore, eager to seize upon 
the native productions. Sometimes these plums were 
carried into the new country by the emigrants, and 


there obtained their first notoriety. Thus, some forty 
or fifty years ago, a native plum was taken from Ala- 
bama to Texas, and it is now introduced from Texas 
under the name of Saffold. The most interesting 
instance of this migration and subsequent fame is 
that of the Miner plum ; and as this appears to have 
been the first native plum to have received a name, it 
may well serve to introduce our narrative. 

The seed which produced the Miner plum was 
planted in 1814, in Knox county, Tennessee, by Wil- 
liam Dodd, an officer under General Jackson. Dodd 
appears to have had two batches of seed, one which 
he gathered the year previous upon Talaposa creek, 
and the other given him by an Indian chief. It is 
not clear from which lot this plum sprung. The 
plum gained some notice when it came into bearing, 
and was known as Old Hickory and General Jack- 
son. In 1823 or 1824 Dodd moved to Illinois and 
settled near Springfield, taking sprouts of this plum 
with him. The plums soon attracted attention among 
Dodd*s neighbors, and the variety was called in its 
new home William Dodd and Chickasaw Chief. The 
year following William Dodd's removal to Illinois, his 
brother moved to Galena, Illinois, and took some of 
the plums. About Galena the plum became known as 
the Hinckley. I do not know how the name Miner 
came to be applied to it, but Downing' s reference to 
Mr. Miner of Pennsylvania — who probably grew and 
disseminated it — undoubtedly explains it. It is said 
by D. B. Wier that the late Hon. James G. Soulard, 
of Galena, introduced this plum to general cultivation. 
As the variety ])ecame disseminated, it received new 
or local names. Downing gives Hinckley, Isabel, 


Gillett, Townsend and Robinson as synonyms of it. 
The Robinson now known is a very different fruit. 
The Miner is one of the best and most popular of the 
native plums. The fruit is large, round or roundish- 
oblong, dull red, skin rather thick; stone cling, short 
and broad, smooth or very nearly so, very short- 
pointed, rather sharp on the front edge ; leaves large 
and heavy, usually inclined to be obovate, rather long- 
pointed, the stalks glandular. It is one of the latest 
ripening of all the plums of its class. 

The second important event in the evolution of 
the native plums is the origination of the Wild 
Goose. On account of its productiveness, earliness, 
beauty, good shipping qualities, and its early intro- 
duction, this is the most popular of the native plums. 
It was first brought to notice by James Harvey, of 
Columbia, Tennessee. Some time before 1850, a man 
shot a wild goose near Columbia, and on the spot 
where the carcass was thrown this plum came up the 
following spring. It was introduced about 1850 by 
the late J. S. Downer, Fairview, Kentuck}'. The 
fruit is large, round-oblong, light red, skin thin, the 
flesh thin and juicy ; cling, stone long and narrow, 
prolonged above into a sharp point and below into a 
narrow base, finely pitted; leaves oblong -lanceolate, 
peach- like, not prominently pointed, the margins finely 
and evenly serrate. Early, of poor quality, but because 
of its many striking features it is widely grown. 

Another important event was the introduction of 
the Robinson. This is a seedling grown by a Mr. 
Pickett, of Putnam county, Indiana, from a seedling 
brought with him from North Carolina about fifty 
years ago, and almost every season (since large 


enough) it has borne abundant crops. The variety 
was neglected, and never brought to the notice of 
the public till 1879, when Dr. J. H. Robinson (of 
the same township) read a paper on Chickasaw plums 
before the Indiana Horticultural Society, and gave a 
very flattering description of this plum. He had 
been watching it since 1872, and had had two good 
crops on his own trees, which bore two bushels to the 
tree five years after planting. It was named by the 
Putnam County Horticultural Society in honor of Dr. 
Robinson. Albertson & Hobbs, nurserymen, of Bridge- 
port, Indiana, introduced the variety in the fall of 
1884 and spring of 1885. 

Since 1860, many plums of the type of these three 
have come into notice in the region south of the Ohio 
and east of Kansas. Some of the leading varieties 
are Wayland, which came up in a plum thicket in 
the garden of Professor H. B. Wayland, Cadiz, Ken- 
tucky, and which was introduced to the public by 
Downer & Bro., Fairview, Kentucky, about 1876; 
Missouri Apricot (or Honey Drop), a plum found 
wild in Missouri and introduced by Stark Bros., 
nurserymen, of Louisiana, Missouri, in 1886 ; More- 
man, a Kentucky plum, introduced by W. F. Heikes 
in 1881 ; Golden Beauty, found wild in Texas, and 
introduced by George Onderdonk in 1874 ; Potta- 
wattamie, found in Tennessee, but taken west and 
first prominently introduced by J. B. Rice, Council 
Bluffs, Iowa, in 1875; Newman (Fig. 23), found in 
Kentucky, and introduced by W. F. Heikes. 

While these events were transpiring in the South, 
another type of native plums was coming into promi- 
nence in the upper Mississippi valley. In this region 


the plums were large and thick -skinned, often flat- 
tened, and bearing a distinct suture or groove, the 
flesh flrm and meaty, and the stone usually large and 
often very flat. The tree, too, is of a different 
type, being a stiff grower, with dull shoots and large, 
heavy, dull, more or less obovate and coarsely toothed 
leaves, while those in the South are slender, 
twiggy growers, with bright or light-colored shoots, 
and more slender and often peach -like, closely toothed 
leaves. The settlers in Wisconsin, northern Illinois, 
Minnesota and Iowa found this type of plum abun- 
dant in the timber belts. Veiy often trees were found 
bearing fruit of unusual size and excellence. Such 
trees were removed to gardens, or seeds of them were 
sown, and very soon a new race of plums had come 
into cultivation. 

The Wolf was one of the first of these varieties 
to be named. This originated on the farm of D. B. 
Wolf, Wapello county, Iowa, about forty years ago, 
from pits said to have been gathered from wild trees. 

The Rollingstone is one of the prominent varieties 
of this type. It was found nearly forty years ago 
on the bank of the Rollingstone Creek, Winona 
county, Minnesota, by O. M. Lord, and he intro- 
duced it to public notice about fifteen years ago. 
The fruit of the Rollingstone is very large (often 1% 
inches each in diameter), round, flattened and truncate 
at the ends, mottled and spotted pink -purple, skin very 
thick ; flesh flrm, sweet and excellent ; semi-cling, 
stone nearly circular, rather flat, sharp on the back 
edge, nearly smooth; leaves large and flrm. 

The Quaker was found wild by Joseph Bundy, of 
Springville, Linn county, Iowa. It was disseminated 



about 1862 by H. C. Raymond, Coancil Blnffs, and 
by him named Quaker, iu complimeDt to Mr. Bundy, 
who is a Quaker. It is a very large purple-red plum, 
with very firm and sweet flesh. 

De Soto is one of the most popular plums in the 
Northwest. It was found wild on the Mississippi 

at De Soto, Wisconsin, and generally iutroducc'd by 
Blisha Hate, Lausiiig, Iowa, in 18G3 or 18C4. 

Forest Garden (Fig. 24), another excellent kind, 
was taken from the woods at Cedar Rapids, Iowa, by 
Thomas Hare, and introduced by II. i'. Raymond, of the 
Forest Garden Nui-series, Council Bluffs, about 1H62. 

Cheney was fiinnd in Jlonnon Ravine, a few miles 


below La Crosse, Wisconsin, some years ago, and 
introdu(*ed by E. Markley, of La Crosse. 

The Weaver, a leading native plum, was found 
wild near Palo, Iowa, l)y Mr. Weaver ; introduced by 
Ennis & Patten in 1875. O. M. Lord tells me that 
plums indistinguishable from the Weaver are wild 
in profusion on the St. Peter or Minnesota River. 

In this way, about a hundred choice forms of the 
native plum of the Northwest have been gathered and 
sorted and given names ; and they are so much more 
hardy and reliable in that region than the European 
type of plum that they will probably form the chief 
foundation from which the future orchard plums of 
the northern prairie states will spring. They are 
already grown to an important commercial extent. 

The Americana Group of Plums 

It will be necessary, before proceeding further 
with the historical data, to discuss the natural species 
from which the plums that we have mentioned have 
come. The layman may not know that the genus 
Prunus, to which the plums and cherries belong, is 
one of the hard knots to botanists. That is, the 
plants are widely variable, and there are few pro- 
nounced or constant marks to distinguish one type 
of variation from another. The numerous forms 
grade into each other so imperceptibly and inextri- 
cably that the genus cannot be readily broken up into 
species. But these genera which are the despair of 
the systematic botanist are the inspiration of the evo- 
lutionist. In them the philosopher thinks that he 
can trace the influences of soil and climate and the 


other environments which cause plants to assume 
new forms. If, therefore, we cannot delimit the 
species of Prunus to our satisfaction, we shall, never- 
theless, find them to be a most suggestive study when 
we attempt to trace the evolution of our native fruits. 

The wild plum of the North is known to botanists 
as Pru9ius Americana (Fig. 25). It was first de- 
scribed by Humphrey Marshall in his **Arbustruin 
Araericanum," in 1783. Marshall's complete account 
is as follows : 

"Prunus Americana. Large Yellow Sweet Plumb. 
This generally rises to the height of 12 or 15 feet, 
spreading into many stiff branches. The leaves are 
oblong, oval, acute pointed, sharply sawed on their 
edges and much veined. The flowers generally come 
out very thick round the branches, often upon thick 
short spurs ; and are succeeded by large oval fruit 
with a sweet succulent pulp. We have a gi-eat variety 
of these, growing naturally in a good moist soil, with 
reddish and yellowish fruit, but differing much in 
size, taste and consistence." 

The species has a wide range. It grows in thickets 
and woods from Newfoundland to Colorado, Florida 
and Texas, and northern Mexico. It is commonly a 
small low-headed tree, or sometimes only a large bush, 
making a thick and usually thorny top. It beai*s a 
firm, meaty, usually compressed, dull -colored late 
fruit, with thick and usually very tough, glaucous 
skin, and large more or less flattened stone, which is 
often nearly or quite free ; and the leaves are large 
obovate, thick, veiny, jagged and dull. The fruits of 
wild forms of Prunus Americana vary widely in sea- 
son, size, shape, flavor, and character of stone. Trees 


in the same clump ofteii vary two weeks iu seasou of 
ripening of fruit, which may vary from dull, deep red 
to yellow, and from the size of a small cherry to that 
of a common garden plum. It should be said, how- 
ever, that there is no true clear yellow fruit in this 
species. The j^ellow of P. Americana is always a 
more or less ill -defined under -color, over which are 
laid blotches of red. The fruits are commonly marked 
with a distinct suture. All the varieties have a light 
purple bloom. The Texan form of Prunus Americana, 
known locally as the Hog plum, appears to differ some- 
what from the northern forms, but there seems to be no 
reason to regard it as a distinct species. The Prunus 
Texana of Scheele is Prunus Americana, as shown by 
an authentic specimen in the Engelmann herbarium at 
St. Louis. The Texan type is not in general culti- 
vation, however, and need not be further dis(;ussed 
here. It is in the northern prairie states, as I have 
said, that this species reaches its greatest excellence 
in fruit -bearing. All the horticultural varieties of 
merit, so far as I know, have originated in northern 
Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, South Dakota, 
Nebraska and Kansas, with one or two unimportant 
exceptions in Texas. 

Some botanists suppose that this northern plum 
really comprises more than one natural species. Pro- 
fessor Sargent is of the opinion that the Prunus 
nigra of Aiton should be revived to designate those 
forms which are characterized by very flat and smooth 
stones, very broad leaves, glandular leaf -stalks and 
calyx lobes, and large flowers ; and he inserts a plate 
and description of what he conceives to be this 
species in his noble "Silva of North America." My 


friend, Professor Charles A. Davis, of Michigan, finds 
two forms, which he distinguishes as follows: "The 
large-flowered form is the more common, and blooms 
about a week or even ten days before the other, and 
usually before the leaves begin to appear. The small- 
flowered form I have never found until this spring, 
when I came upon a clump of it in full bloom, and at 
once became interested in it because of its decided dif- 
ferences from the other and common form. The trees 
were larger, more spreading, and with a much rougher 
bark than the large -flowered form; and a number of 
the trees bore flowers with a decidedly yellowish tint, 
which was very noticeable from a short distance. The 
fruit was late, maturing the middle of September, and 
was reddish, almost purple in very ripe specimens, with 
a whitish bloom, small and rather palatable." 

Aiton described his Prunus nigra in "Hortus 
Kewensis," in 1789, from a tree growing in England. 
He did not know Marshall's previous description. In 
1808, John Sims figured what he supposed to be the 
same plant in the "Botanical Magazine." There is 
little in either of these descriptions which can be con- 
strued as delimiting the plant from Marshall's Prunus 
Americana. Perhaps the only designative characters 
are the "petiolis glandulosis," and the "glandular- 
toothed" calyx segments.* Six years ago, in my bul- 

•Aiton described Prunua nigra as follows (Hort. Kew. ii. 165, 1789):— 

14. P. umliellis sessilibus solitariis paacifloris, foliis deciduis ovatis acomlnatis, 
iwtinlis biglaodulosis. 

Black Cherry Tree. 

Nat. of Canada. 

introd, 1773, by Messrs. Kennedy and Lee. 

Fl. April and May. 
I have seen Alton's specimen in the Natural History Musenm, at Sonth 
Kensington. It comprises a spray of foliage and a flowering branch. It is 
apparently the same plant which contemporaneons botanists are calling Prunu§ 


letin upon "The Cultivated Native Plums and Cher- 
ries," I was unable to find any warrant for accepting 
two species of these northern plums, although I had 
made a studious effort to do so for several years. In 
the meantime I have studied the plants diligently in 
the wild and under cultivation, and have now gone 
over much herbarium material anew, but I have been 
utterly unable to find characters upon which to make 
two species. The glandular character of the calyx- 
lobes may be present or absent in the same horticul- 
tural variety when grown in different places, and it 
is not associated with large or early flowers, with 
biglandular leaf-stalks or with large and flat stones 
in the fruit. The presence or absence of two glands 
upon the leaf-stalk is of no classificatory importance. 
The glands are frequently present and absent on con- 
tiguous leaves on the same tree. In the shape of the 
stones there is the most insensible gradation from the 
small turgid stone, which is assumed to be designative 
of PruHHS Americana, to the great flat stone of Prunus 
nigra. The accompanying illustration (Fig. 26) shows 
this admirably. Nos. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 are stones of 
named varieties which Professor Sargent considers to 
belong to Prunus nigra. All the others are forms of 
typical Prunus Americana. One of the flattest stones 
in the lot is No. 2, which came from a tree in cen- 
tral New York which has most pronounced characters 
of the extreme and typical Americana form. The 
inventory of these stones is as follows : 

No. 1, Prunus Americana from Colorado ; 2, same 
from central New York (stone flat, from a small very 
early, red fruit) ; 3, same from Wisconsin (stone very 
turgid); 4, same from central Michigan (small-flow- 


ered, typical Americana form, but stone as flat and 
as sti-ongly ed^d as in the nigra form); 5, Deep 
Creek, grown in Maryland ; 6, Louisa, grown in 
Maryland ; 7, De Soto, grown in Maryland ; 8, De 
Soto, grown in Iowa; 9, Forest Garden, grown in 
Xew York; 10, Pnrple Yosemite (Pninus nigra), 
grown in Maryland; 11, Quaker (P. nigra), grown 


iu Maryland; 12, Weaver (P. nigra), grown in Mary- 
land ; 13, Weaver, grown in Minnesota ; 14, Weaver, 
grown in Texas. 

To give the reader an opportunity to compare this 
interesting variation in plum stones with like varia- 
tion in another and foreign species, I insert a picture 
(Pig. 27) of stones of the myrobalan plum (Primus 
cerasifera) selected from an imported commercial 
sample. (See discussion beginning on page 208.) 

The early flowering of some trees of this Pninus 
Americana stock is a most conspicuous character, but 
I do not see that it should excite any more interest 
than the very early maturing of fruit on some trees ; 
nor do I see that an occasional large -flowered form 
is any more worthy of being accorded specific rank 
than a large-fruited form. These are all probably 
individual variations, and likely have no close rela- 
tion to the genetic history of the species. 

I am obliged, therefore, to unite Pninus nigra 
with P. Americana. This I regret the more because 
it is undoubtedly true that there are two or more well 
marked wild varieties passing as P. Americana , and 
growing together in the East. One type is a twiggy, 
vii'gate grower, with large and mostly earlier flowers ; 
another is a stout and stiff grower, with small flowers. 
So far as I have been able to determine, the fruits 
and stones of these two forms, save possibly in time 
of rii>oning, are not characteristically distinct. These 
forms are certainly common in central New York and 
in Michigan. It is a question, however, if the habit 
of growth is not largely determined by the soil, posi- 
tion, or other einuimstances iu which the trees grow. 
At all events, these differences are not more marked 


than similar varieties in elms, mulberries or haw- 
thorns, and which no one associates with specific 
differences. I am not yet prepared to affirm that 
the wild plum of the North contains but a single 
species, but I am convinced that no botanist has yet 
been able to draw designative characters to separate 
out a second or third species. 

The extreme forms of this Americana plum are 
so well marked, however, that it will be useful, for 
purposes of study, if incidental names be given them. 
I am, therefore, inclined to follow Waugh* in calling 
this northern type Primus Americana var. nigra. 

It should be said that beyond the Mississippi there 
is a very pubescent -leaved form of Prunus Americana, 
which is known to botanists as the variety mollis,^ 
It is from this type that the Wolf plum comes. 
There is also a form of this with flowers as com- 
pletely double as those of St. Peter's Wreath, or 

*F. A. Waugh, Bull. 53, Vt. Exp. Sta. 58 (Aug. 1806):— 

P. Americana, Marsh. Common Wild Plum. The type distinguished by 
entire calyx lobes, which are pubescent on the inner surface ; stone turgid ; 
leaves oval or slightly obovnte ; petioles mostly without glands. Tree spreading, 
ragged, thorny, 8-20 ft. high ; flowers large, while, on slender pedicels ; leaves 
very coarnely veined, never glossy or shining ; fruit more or less flattened upon 
the sides. Arm and meaty, the skin tough and glaucous and never glossy, ripening 
through yellow to red. Occurs wild from New Jersey and Now York, to Mon* 
tana and Colorada. It varies southward, in Texas and New Mexico represented 
mostly by the variety mollis. 

Viir. NIGRA. Caxada Plum, Red Plum (P. nigrat Ait ; P. Americana, T. A 
6. : and 6th ed. Gray's Manual). In its extreme forms easily distinguished Ity the 
glandular-serrute calyx lobes, glabrous on the inner surface ; compressed stone ; 
broadly oblong-ovate to oTK>vate leaves with petioles bearing two glands. Flowers 
large, white, with short, thick peduncles conspicuously marked by the scnrs left 
by the falling of the bud scales ; pedicels dark re<l, slender, glabrous ; calyx tube 
broadly obcouic, dark red on the outer and bright red on the inner surface ; fruit 
oblong-oval, oruige-red ; stone nearly oval, compressed. Occurs wild from New- 
foundland west to Rainy and Assiniboine rivers in Canada, and commonly In the 
New England states, where it is found along roadsides and in waste places. 

tThis is Prunus australis of Munson. See Waugh, Bot. Gaz. xxvi., 5U. 


siuiilar spireas. The named varieties of native plums 
which, it seems to me, can be confidently referred 
to PmuHS Americana are named below. Thei-e are 
others which belong to this species, but I have not 
had an opportunity of critically examining them: 

American Eagle, Beaty's Choice, Cheney, Cliip- 
peway, Cottrell, Deep Creek, De Soto, Forest Garden, 
Gaylord, Harrison's Peach, Hawkeye, Illinois Iron- 

Fig, 27. VsrlUion In ituDel of MTnbslMl plnm. Nntarid 

elad, Itaska, Jessie, Kickapoo, Late Rollingstone, Le 
Dnc, Little Seedling (of Chas. Lnedloff), Louisa, 
Lnedloff's Green, Luedloff's Red, Maquoketa, Min- 
uetonka, Mnssey, Newton Egg, Ocheeda, Peffer's 
Pi-eminni, Purple Yoseraite, Qnaker, Eollingstone, 
Smith's Red, Speer, Stoddart, W'uzata, Weaver, 
Wier's Large Red, Wyant. Yellow Sweet. Of the 
variety mollis, of Primus Americana, two named fmit 
varieties are well marked, the Wolf (or Wolf Free), 
and the Van Buren. 


The Chickasaw Oroup 

It now I'emaiiis to discuss the botanical status of 
the southern type of plums, of which the Newman, 
Pottawattamie, Wild Goose, Miner and Wayland are 
examples. We shall find that greater uncertainty 
and confusion attach to these fruits than to their 
congeners of the North. These southern fruits are 
generally known as the Chickasaw plums. If we 
examine them critically, however, we shall find that 
they fall somewhat readily into two groups. One of 
these groups we shall call the true Chickasaws (Fig. 
28). This group differs from other plums by a more 
slender, spreading and zigzag growth, usually smaller 
size of tree, red twigs, by smaller, lanceolate or 
oblong -lanceolate, very closely serrate, shining leaves, 
which are conduplicate or trough -like in habit, by 
early small flowers which, upon old wood, are densely 
clustered on the spurs, and by an early red (rarely 
yellow) and more or less spotted translucent fruit, 
the flesh of which is soft, juicy, and more or less 
stringy, and very tightly adherent to the small, broad, 
roughish stone. 

This species, like Pnmus Americana, was founded 
by Humphrey Marshall in 1785. His full descrip- 
tion is as follows: ^^Prunus angusfifoUa, Chickasaw 
Plumb. This is scarcely of so large a growth as 
the former [P. Americana^, but rising with a stiff, 
shrubby stalk, dividing into many branches, which 
are garnished with smooth lance -shaped leaves, much 
smaller and narrower than the first kind [P. Ameri- 
cana^, a little waved on their edges, marked with 
very fine, slight, coloured serratures, and of an equal, 


shining green colour, on both sides. The blossoms 
generally come out very thick, and are succeeded 
by oval, or often somewhat egg-shaped fruit, with 
a very thin skin, and soft, sweet pulp. There are 
varieties of this with yellow and crimson coloured 
fruit. These being natives of the Southern states, 
are somewhat impatient of much cold." It was later 
described by Michaux as Primus Chicasa,* It is also 
undoubtedly the plant intended by Rafinesque, when 
he described Pnmus stenophyllus in his "Florula 
Ludoviciana," in 1817. In a wild state the little trees 
or bushes are thorny, and the thorns persist in some 
of the cultivated varieties. It grows wild, often in 
dense thickets, from southern Delaware to Florida, 
and westward to Kansas and Texas. It is commonly 
stated in the books that the Chickasaw plum is not 
native to the Atlantic states, and some suppose that 
it was introduced into the United States from 
countries to the south of us. I have been unable 
to find sufficient reasons for these opinions, and I 
believe that the species is native to the Southeastern 
states. In Maryland, as I have seen it, it behaves 
like an indigenous plant, and the people regard it 
as a true native. The small, acerb fruit of the 
thorny and scraggly wild bushes is known in Marj'- 
land as "mountain cherry." 

One of the first persons to call attention to the 
horticultural possibilities of the Chickasaw plum 

*The specimens in Michanx's herbarium, at Paris, are Pruntis hortulana, not 
the plant we have taken to be P. angustifolia ; bnt they are marked with an 
interrogation point, and they may not be the plant which he meant to designate. 
His Prunus hpemalis is P. Americana ; his P. gphtrrocarpa is P. maritima. 
Of his CeroMUM Iforealis there are two things on the sheet, bnt they are both forms 
of P. hortvlana. 


was William N. White, of Athens, Georgia. In the 
"Horticulturist" for 1852, he describes the tree and 
fruit, — the latter "either bright red or yellow" — and 
speaks of one variety which ripens nearly a month 
later than the ordinary forms, the fruit being "nearly- 
free from astringency" and "about tlie size of Prince's 
Yellow Gage." In the original edition of his "Gar- 
dening for the South," 1856, Mr. White also mentions 
the Chickasaw plum, and adds: "Doubtless many 
excellent native varieties will be originated from this 
hardy native fruit. Some are now found almost 
entirely free from astringencj'. This plum seems 
free from curculio, and never fails of a crop." 

The varieties which seem to be the most unmis- 
takably true Chickasaws, among those which I have 
studied, are the following : 

African, Arkansas Lombard, Caddo Chief, Coletta, 
Early Red, El Paso, Hoffman, Jennie Lucus, Lone 
Star, Newman (Figs. 23, 28), Ogeechee, Pottawatta- 
mie, Robinson, Schley's Large Red, Transparent or 
Yellow Transparent. 

The Horinlana Oronp 

The second group of these southern plums is 
probably the most important type of native plums 
now in cultivation. It includes varieties character- 
ized by strong, wide -spreading growth, and mostly 
smooth twigs ; a firm, juicy, briglit- colored, thin- 
skinned fruit, which is never flattened ; a clinging, 
turgid, comparatively small, rough stone, which is 
sometimes prolonged at the ends, but is never con- 
spicuously wing -margined, and by comparatively thin 


and firm, shining, smooth, flat, more or less peach- 
like, ovate- lanceolate or ovate, long -pointed leaves, 
which are mostly closely and obtusely glandnlar- ser- 
rate, and the stalks of which are usually glandular. 
In the wild state, it appears to follow the Mississippi 
river from northern Illinois to Arkansas, in its mid- 
dle region ranging as far east as eastern Kentucky 
and Tennessee, and possibly to Maryland, and in 
the southwest spreading over Texas. It is probable 
that the large red plums of which Humphrey 
Mai*shall had heard, over a century ago, as grow- 
ing upon the Mississippi, and which he called 
Prunus Mississippi, were of this hortulana group. 
Marshall's complete description of this plum is as 
follows: ^^ Prunus Mississippi. Crimson Plumb. This 
grows naturally upon the Mississippi, and is of 
larger size than most of the other kinds. The 
fruit are crimson coloured, and somewhat acid." 
( Arbustrum Americanum , 112 . ) 

To this group belong the Wild, Goose, Miner, 
and Wayland, and their kin. It had not been 
recognized and delimited by botanists as distinct 
from other tribes of plums, and six years ago, 
when attempting a monograph of the cultivated 
native plums, I proposed the species Prunus hortu- 
lana to designate the group. The name hortulana 
was chosen to record the fact that these interesting 
plums were first studied by horticulturists rather 
than by botanists. The varieties are intermediate 
betweed the Americana and Chickasaw groups. The 
fruits lack entirely the dull -colored, compressed, 
thick-skinned and meaty characters of the Ameri- 
canas, and approach very closely to the Chickasaws. 


They are usually covered with a thin bloom, and are 
more or less marked by small spots. They are variable 
in period of ripening, there being a difference of no 
less than two months between the seasons of some 
of the cultivated varieties. In color they range from 
the most vivid crimson to pure golden yellow. 

In the seven years which have now elapsed since 
I made my first serious study of the botanical fea- 
tures of these fruits, I have had trees and botanical 
specimens of the native plums constantly before me 
in great variety, and certain novel conclusions 
respecting the botanical status of this hortulana 
class have been forced upon me. If one attempts 
to make an analytical study of this Prunus hortu- 
lana, he is first of all impressed with the singular 
fact that, whereas cultivated varieties of it are numer- 
ous, it is rare in a wild state, and is almost 
unknown to field botanists. It turns up now and 
then in the Mississippi valley region and in Texas, 
but the stations of the feral plants are widely scat- 
tered and local. Associated with this comparative 
rarity of the wild plant is the fact that the species 
has no distinctive range. It grows where both the 
Chickasaw and Americana types grow, but it appears 
not to occur where either of those species alone 
grows. Well-marked species of plants nearly 
always have an individual geographical range, but 
the distribution of Prunus hortulana seems to be 
accidental. The next remarkable feature which strikes 
the critical student is that, although there are cer- 
tain types of it which seem to have well-marked 
specific characters, it grades off imperceptibly to the 
Chickasaw group on one hand and to the Americana 


FIk. at. Kuutirhii pinm. 

gronp on tlie other. So trae is this, that I cannot 
give a single technical character which seems to be 
invariably associated with the species. A fonrth 
noticeable feature is the tendency to emphatic de- 
partures from the assumed type of the species, 
especially in the direction of large-leaved forms, as 
in the Kanawha (Fig. 29). The reader has already 
guessed my conclusion : Prunus hortulana is a name 


for a brood of natural hybrids between Pruntis an- 
gustifolia and Primus Americuna.^ 

I am aware that it is a dangerous expedient to 
invoke hybridity to account for inexplicable behaviors 
of plants. It is likely to serve only as a cloak for 
superficial knowledge, but it is convenient, never- 
theless, and in the present instance there is no other 
resort to cover the writer's ignorance of the subject. 
But there is really much explicit foundation for the 
belief in this hybridity, as I have already explained; 
and it is known that many of these native plums 
can be freely hybridized. I am the more convinced 
of the validity of this position from the similar 
behavior of certain wild apples, the vagaries of which 
are explained in the next chapter. Some of the 
plums which I have refeiTed to Primus hortulana 
may be direct developments from the true Chickasaw 
type, and others may be direct offshoots or variations 
from the Americana type. In my monograph upon 
"The Cultivated Native Plums and Cherries" (Bull. 
38, Cornell Exp. Sta.), I made a sub-group of this 
hortulana class to comprise "a few anomalous varie- 
ties which appear to be intermediate between Prunus 
hortulana and P. Americana. They may be an off- 
shoot of P. hortulana, or it is possible that they 
constitute a distinct species. The Miner is par- 
ticularly well marked, but there are others which 
it is somewhat difficult to separate from P. Jwr- 
iulana. The group differs from the species by 
the dull and comparatively thick leaves, which are 

•This disposition was first made in Bot. Gaz. 189G, p. 462, but it was aug. 
gested two years earlier (see « Survival of the Unlike," 424). See. also. Bull. 131. 
Cornell Exp. Sta. 170 (1897). 


conspicuously veiny below, and irre^larly coarsely 
toothed, and more or less obovate in outline, by a 
late, very firm fruit, and by a more or less smooth 
and American a -like stone. I am not able to designate 
the range of the wild plant, but it appears to occur 
in Illinois (and perhaps Indiana), Missouri, Ten- 
nessee, and perhaps in Arkansas." This sub-group 
I called Prumis horfulana var. Mineri. The varie- 
ties Miner and Forest Rose are typical of it. These 
are so near Primus Americana that Sargent refers 
them to that species. In foliage and fruit they have 
marks of the hortulana tribe, and I now regard them 
as hybrids — perhaps secondary ones — which partake 
very strongly of the Americana blood. 

One who diligently studies the native plums will 
be impressed with the great variation which is asso- 
ciated with change of climate or locality. In the 
southern states, the flowers tend to appear wholly 
in advance of the leaves, and they are borne upon 
short stalks, or may be nearly or quite sessile. In 
the North, the flowers and leaves are generally coeta- 
neous, and the flower stalks are usually longer This 
curious phenomenon, which is illustrated in the 
accompanying engravings (Figs. 30, 31), is due to 
the more sudden outburst of spring in the North, 
by virtue of which all the latent energies of the plant 
are pushed into simultaneous expansion*. The same 
sudden outburst is seen in Prunus Americana (Pig. 
32). This difference is often so pronounced in 
botanical specimens of flowering shoots of the same 
horticultural variety, taken in the South and the 
North, that even good botanists may be confounded 

•S«e, also, "Survival of the Unlike," Essay XVIT. 



by it. But the differeuees in climate are not recorded 
ill the flowering and the leafing alone, but often alao 
in the form and textm-L' of the 
leaves and in the character of 
the fruit. The Newman plum, 
as I have seen it growing in 
Maryland, I should refer un- 
hesitatingly to Pruniis angusti- 
folia, but as it grown in New 
York, I am in ^_ 

doubt whether to 
refer it to that spe- 
cies or to Frunus 
horiulana. These ) 
considerations i 
cliue me the more 
to discard my Prunun horiulana \ 
as an original specius, and to I 
use it in the future merely to 1 
designate a well-mai-ked group f 
or raee of cultivated pUinis, the* 
origin of which is to be found 
in contemporary environments 
and in the natural mixing of 
two pai-ent stocks ; and thereby 
the name hortuiana — "belong- 
ing to a garden"- 
more significant than I in- 
tended. I do not propotju thi^ 
as my final conclnsion, but it states the 
I see it at this writing. To my mind, this view 
of the origin of these valuable hortuiana plums is 
most satisfactory and inspiring, for it is a working 


and elastic hypothesis which explains and co-ordi- 
nates the rapid events of contemporary evolution. 

An interesting peculiarity of the Wild Goose 
plum is the facility with which it appears to 
hybridize with the peach. The most famous in- 
stance of such apparent hybridization is that of 
the so-called Blackman plum. About thirty j'ears 
ago, Mrs. Charity Clark procured from an orchard 
in Rutherford county, Tennessee, which contained 
Wild Goose and Washington plums, seeds of plums, 
and gave them to Dr. Blackman, of Nashville. One 
tree among the resulting seedlings bore good fruit, 
which was called the Blackman, and was dissemi- 
nated by a local nurseryman. A competing nurserj^ 
in endeavoring to procure cions from this tree, inadver- 
tently cut them from an adjacent tree — itself one of 
the batch of seedlings — and sold the trees which it 
grew as Blackman. Now, this second tree makes fruit- 
buds in abundance, but they never open ; and from the 
resemblance of the leaves to those of the peach, the 
plant is generally thought to be a hybrid between the 
Wild Goose and the peach. Curiously enough, the 
genuine Blackman has never been widely disseminated, 
but the spurious and worthless substitute has been sold 
in lai'ge quantities. In order to avoid confusion, the 
original Blackman has been rechristened Charity Clark. 
There are, therefore, two Blackman plums, one of 
which is practically unknown to cultivation, but which 
has been renamed, and the other is barren and will 
soon pass from sight. 

The only authentic hybrid which has come from the 
union of the Wild Goose and the peach has been pro- 
duced by J. W. Kerr, of Maryland. Mr. Kerr's tree, 


as I recall it, is large, spreading and peach -like. The 
leaves are long and peach -like, although rather broad 
and short- pointed, but the flower-buds, although they 
form in profusion, never open, so that the tree is bar- 
ren. This is a hybrid between the Wild Goose and 
Troth's Early peach. Twenty -five flowers of Wild 
Goose were emasculated in the bud and covered with 
paper sacks. When in full bloom, peach pollen was 
applied, but the flowers were not again covered. 
Twenty -one of the flowers set fruit, and twenty -one 
trees were obtained from the seeds. Twenty of the 
trees were indistinguishable from peach, but the re- 
maining one, as indicated above, gives every evidence 
of being an intermediate. 

The varieties that I have studied which fall into 
Primus hortulana are as follows : 

Clara, Clark, Cumberland, Garfield, Golden Beauty, 
Indian Chief, Kanawha, Missouri Apricot (Honey 
Drop), Moreman, Mrs. Clifford, PooFs Pride, Reed, 
Roulette, Saffold, Sophie, Sucker State, Texas Belle, 
Wayland, Whitaker, Wild Goose, Wooten, World 

To the Miner sub-group I should refer the follow- 
ing varieties: 

Clinton, Forest Rose, Idol, Indiana Red, Iris, Langs- 
don, Leptune, Miner, Prairie Flower, Rachel. 

Since the above account of the hortulana plums 
was written, Waugh has given the group independent 
study, and writes of it as follows:* 

When, in 1892, Professor Bailey proposed the species Prunus 
hortuluna to include the Wild Goose plum and its nearest rela- 
tives, it was at first a relief and afterward a puzzle to horticul- 

*"The New View of the Horttilana Plnms," Garden and Forest, Sept. 1, 1897. 


taristt). It wag a relief to have these anomalous forms separated 
from Prtfwiw Americana and from P. angustifoUaj where they had 
previously caused confusion ; and it was gratifying to have them 
separately characterized, even though it was very difficult to 
make the specific description fit all the varieties. But to main- 
tain a description for the species which would fit all the varie- 
ties has been an ever-growing puzzle. And thus a second time 
Professor Bailey has brought us relief by his decision that this 
is "a mongrel type of plums, * * * no doubt hybrids" 
of Pmnus Americana and P. angustifolia. 

This new view of the hortulana plums seems likely to find 
much readier currency among pomologists than did the distinct 
species view. Indeed, some reputable horticulturists have never 
accepted the separate species notion ; and no two anj'where or at 
any time have fully agreed upon the varieties which were to be 
referred to the species. 

These cultivated varieties present an inextricable confusion 
of closely graded differences of character passing without a 
break from Pmnus Americana ^ through the Miner group (Bailey's 
P. hortulana var. Mineri)^ then through the Wild Goose group, 
and by way of such varieties as Schley, Clifford and Macedonia 
into the true Chickasaws. There is absolutely no line of demar- 
cation, however dim, among these varieties. Such a series of 
forms cannot be conveniently doled out into species, even when 
we take the most advanced evolutionary view of what constitutes 
a species. But as soon as the Wild Goose group is understood to 
be a company of hybrids, the matter becomes comparatively clear. 
We can easily Wlieve that there have been numerous independent 
hybrid origins followed by still more numerous secondary, ter- 
tiary and quart enary crosses, and these would account fully for 
the extraordinary variability and wide diversity of characters 
among these plums. The varieties of the Miner group may rea- 
sonably be sup|>osed to be secondary hybrids between Wild Croose 
types and PruMus AnteriittM.i ; or they may be» in some instances, 
primary hybrids in which the Americana influence has preponder- 
ated. Such Tarieties as Ohio Prolific, Schley, Texas Belle and 
Wooten may be sup{.K)sed, on the other band, to be seeondaiy 
hybrids between Wild Goose and the Chickasaws. 

All this will drive every plum student, pomologist or botanist 


to a conolusion which we ought to have reached independently 
before; namely, that no full classification of our cultivated varie- 
ties can be made which shall be satisfactory to everybody. It is 
a matter of unquestionable convenience to divide our multiform 
varieties into several groups, but the lines between these groups 
are purely imaginary and arbitrary, and certain varieties which 
come near the division line somewhere may be put into one 
group by one man and into the other group by another, and 
both men be right. It is all a matter of judgment, and a very 
delicate matter, too. There has already been too much contro- 
versy over some of these doubtful varieties. What plum students 
need now is less controversy and more patience. 

The cultivated hortulana plums may be best understood by 
arranging them in four groups. Three of these have been men- 
tioned — the Miner group, the Wild Goose group, and the Schley or 
Clifford group. These form an unbroken series from Pmnus 
Americana to P. angustifoUa, There is a fourth group at present 
classified with the hortulanas, but comparatively distinct from the 
others. This group is made up of such varieties as Wayland, 
Moreman, Golden Beauty, Beed, Leptune, Kanawha and others. 

Wangh makes a further contribution to the subject 
in the following sketch of "The Wayland group of 
plums : "* 

In an article in last week's issue [quoted above] I called 
attention to the continuity of the series of intergradients 
between the Americana and the Chickasaw plums, and said 
that the series might be roughly marked by three types, the 
Miner, the Wild (Joose, and the Schley or Clifford. It was 
also noted that another group, standing somewhat aside from 
this series, might, for the present at least, be regarded as 
belonging among the hortulana plums, and that this group 
is comparatively distinct, and very interesting. This I have 
designated as the Wayland groupt from one of its best types, 
the Wayland plum. Golden Beauty is also a good type of this 
group, and is well known in the southern states, though not 

^Garden and Forest, September 8, 1807. 
tVermont Experiment Station, lOth Report, p. 103. 


northward. Moreman is the commonest variety of the group 
in the northern states, but is not well known in the South, and 
is not quite so good an exponent of the characters which mark 
this group. After considerable deliberation, I think that Way- 
land is the best and most convenient group name for these 

Of course, this group is not free from puzzling forms which 
show equivocal characters, apparently borrowed from the Ohicka- 
saws, Americanas, and other groups ; but on the whole, it is 
much better marked than the Miner or Wild Goose sections, 
which have for several years been thought worthy of recog- 
nition. The varieties are characterized by straight, slender, 
dark-colored twigs ; very large, luxuriant foliage, broad leaves, 
which are often pubescent on the larger veins beneath, and 
which have from two to six glands on the petioles ; axillary 
buds often triple ; blossoms and fruit very lat«, mostly after 
Miner ; fruit spherical, or nearly so, red or yellow, with many 
small dots, thin-skinned and of fine quality. 

Several varieties of this group are already widely distributed 
in cultivation. Others of considerable promise have been 
recently introduced. Those which I have had the opportunity 
to examine, and which seem to belong with Wayland, rather 
than in any other group, are Columbia, Crimson Beauty, Cum- 
berland, Garfield, Golden Beauty, Kanawha, Leptune, Missouri 
Apricot, Moreman, Nimon, Reed, Sucker State, Wayland and 
Worldbeater. Mr. T. V. Munson, in correspondence, mentions 
another variety, Erby^s September, growing in his grounds, 
which apparently belongs with those named here. 

Of these varieties, Cumberland, Golden Beauty, Kanawha, 
Leptune, Reed and Wayland best show the distinctive foliage 
and tree characters which separate them from adjoining types. 
These are all good plums from the planter^s standpoint. All 
of them are very ornamental. Reed is one of the most beauti- 
ful trees of its size I ever saw. 

These varieties have usually been put in the Wild Goose 
class, though Bailey, who has done most of the work in the 
classification of native plums, puts Leptune, one of the best 
marked varieties, into the Miner group, and President Berck- 
mans, who introduced Kanawha, says "this is beyond question 


a form of PruntLS Americana^** The whole group has also been 
roughly referred to P. glandulosa, Torr. & Gray, but this is evi- 
dently a mistake. Mr. T. V. Munson has given this question 
serious study, and has concluded that all these varieties are 
derived from P, rivularis, Scheele. This is a somewhat start- 
ling decision, and extremely important if true. The facts are, 
however, first, that we are yet too poorly acquainted with this 
species to make critical comparisons ; secondly, that Scheele's 
description, made at second hand from Lindheimer's speci- 
mens, is not sufficiently precise to preclude mistakes ; thirdly, 
that the description,* what there is of it, fails, in important 
particulars, to fit the varieties in question ; and fourthly, that 
many of these varieties have originated in localities where it 
is almost impossible to believe that P. rivularis could be grow- 
ing. (See pages 223, 224.) 

To particularize further, the National Herbarium t contains 
only the following specimens : Those of Lindheimer, collected 
in western Texas in 1846 ; one by Hall, from Dallas ; two by 
Wolf, collected in Illinois in 1875, and very possibly cultivated 
specimens ; and one of doubtful authenticity, by Thomas Bass- 
ler, from Manhattan, Kansas. Other herbaria seem to have 
no better representation of the species, and this could hardly 
be the case were it so common and so widely distributed as to 
furnish the well-known cultivated varieties mentioned above. 

*Slnee this description is inaccessible to many students, it will be well to 
transcribe it here : 

Prunxu rivularis, Scheele, Idnncea, xxi., 594. Fmtex 3-C pedalis; rami anga* 
lati glabri nitidi cinerei verrucnlosi, verrucie parvie ooufertaB. PetioU glandtilosi 
canaliculati puberuli. Folia ovate-oblouga acuuiinata InsBqnaliter serrulata, basi 
glandulosa, sabtns sporeie pubescentia, snprn -glabra, serratune callosaB confertte. 
Umbellfe laterales sessiles snbbiflorip. Sqnamie gemmae floriferse aphyllse. Pe- 
duncuU glabri elongati subglandnlosi, jietiolnm SBQuantes. Flores . . . Dmpa 
rubra globosa glabra nitida acida. 

'^Gesellschaftlich an Bachrandem, selltener aber jedesmal in Menge zusam- 
menstehenden auf Hitgeln. Strauch 3-6' hoch, Fnicht kiigeUg, hell-roth, ange- 
nehm s&uerlieh, von der Grosse einer Kirsche biszu der einer Mirabelle, }4-i" 
dick. Die Tawakong-Indianer sollen die Frucht, mit honig gekocht, sehr lieben. 
Die Texaner nennen sie 'Tawakong plum.' "—Lindheimer. 

Gehort zur Rotte Eucerasus. Torr. & Gray. 

Seltener stehen die Blumen einzeln.' 

tThe specimens in the National Herbarium were kindb' examine<l for me by 
Mr. Lorster H. Dewey. 


The varietiea in quoBtion differ from Scheele's description in 
having single straight trnnks, in being from fifteen to twenty 
feet high, instead of from three to six feet, and in having oft<en 
three flowers to each fascicle, instead of one or two. The dis- 
tribution of the species is given by Conlter as ^^not uncommon 
on the Colorado and its tributaries, and extending to the upper 
Guadalupe and the Leona/' and the specimens referred to 
above give no important evidence of its occurrence this side 
of western Texas. In comparison with this distribution, the 
origin of the cultivated varieties should be carefully considered. 
As far as known, their sources are as follows : Cumberland, 
Tennessee ; Garfield, Ohio ; Golden Beauty, southwest Texas ; 
Kanawha, Fairview, Kentucky ; Leptune, Arkansas ; Missouri 
Apricot, Missouri ; Moreman, Kentucky ; Sucker State, Illinois ; 
Way land, Cadiz, Kentucky. 

The evidence of this list is quite contrary to the supposition 
of a Prunu^ rivularis parentage for the varieties named ; but, 
on the other hand, must be regarded as decidedly favorable to 
their classification in the pseudo- species, P. hortuUina. 

It seems to me important that this group of plums should 
be understood separately, and that its relationships should be 
worked out as speedily and as accurately as possible ; and 
while the evidence here reviewed leads me to reject the 
hypothesis of their derivation from Prunus rivulariSf that 
species seems to be a promising one, and we would do well 
not to lose sight of it too soon. 

The Marianna Ghroup 

In 1884 a strange plum was introduced from Texas 
under the name of Marianna. It was said to be a na- 
tive. It proved to have little value for fruit, however, 
because it is not very productive and the quality of 
the plums seems to lack character ; but it is found 
to grow readily from cuttings, and it soon came to be 
extensively used as stock upon which to graft other 
kinds of plums, and even peaches and apricots ; and it 


is still much employed for this purpose in the South. 
A study* of this new type of plum at once revealed some 
striking botanical features, and it was found that the 
De Caradeuc, an older plum, is very closely related to 
it ; and the Hattie is probably to be referred to the 
same group. This class differs from any of the fore- 
going in habit of tree, very early flowering, elliptic- 
ovate, rather small and finely serrate dull leaves, gland- 
less leaf -stalks, and soft, spherical, very juicy plums 
of a "sugar and water" character, and broad, ovate 
stones, which are scarcely pointed and are prominently 
furrowed on the front edge. The botanical position of 
these plums has been a subject of speculation, to which 
1 have added my full share of confusion by referring 
them to Pnmus unibellata of the South. I was soon 
convinced, however, that the De Caradeuc is a myro- 
balan plum, and that the Marianna is either the same 
species or a hybrid between it and some American 
plum, possibly the Wild Goose. This seemed to be a 
startling conclusion at the time that it was first ex- 
pressed, particularly as the Marianna had come to be so 
extensively used as a stock to replace the myrobalan, 
which appears to be growing in disfavor. Before 
entering into detail containing the origin of these 
plums, it will be useful to our inquiry to clear up some 
of the history of the myrobalan plum itself. 

The myrobalan plum is a foreigner. The word 
myrobalan (or myrobolan), as a noun, is used to desig- 
nate various small tropical fruits which are used in the 
arts, chiefly for tanning purposes. It is now com- 
monly applied to the fruits of the species of Terminalia, 
of the family Combretaceae, which are imported from 

*In Btdl. 38, Cornell Exp. Sta. 1802. 


India. The word was early applied to a small plum 
grown in Europe, probably because of some resemblance 
in size or other characteristics to the myrobalans of 
commerce. This plum has had a curious history. The 
first undoubted reference to it which I know is in Clu- 
sius' Rariorum Plantarum Historia, 1601. Clusius 
gives a good figure of it, but says that it was not ^n- 
erally known. Some people thought that it came origi- 
nally from Constantinople, and others that it came 
from Gaul. Clusius leans toward the latter view. He 
calls it the mjTobalan plum, but does not know the 
origin of the name. For nearly two hundred years 
after Clusius wrote, the fruit is described by various 
authors in different parts of Europe, under the names 
of myrobalan and cherry plum, during which time 
doubts were cast upon its European origin. Thus 
Tournefort in 1700 said that it came from North 
America. In 1789 Ehrhart* described it as a distinct 
species under the name Primus cerasifera, or "cherry- 
bearing plum," and said distinctly that it was a native 
of North America. Some thirty years before this time 
LinnaBus had described it as Pnnius domesiica var' 
myrobalan, and gave it a European origin. In 1812* 
Loiseleur-Deslongchampst described it as Prunus myro- 
balana, saying that it was supposed to be of Americau 
origin. From that time until now the nativity of the 
myrobalan plum has been uncertain, but European 
writers have usually avoided the difliculty by referring 
it to America ; and American botanists have for the 
most part ignored it because it is a cultivated plant. 
So it happens that this pretty fruit has fallen between 

•Beitrage zur Naturkuiule, iv. 17. 

fNouveau Duhamel Traite des Arbres et Arlmstes, v. 184, t. 57, Pig. 1. 


two countries, and is homeless. Sereno Watson, in 
his "Index to North American Botany," published in 
1878, refers Ehrhart's Prunus cerasifera to the com- 
mon beach plum {Pninus maritima) of the Atlantic 
coast. But the myrobalan is wholly different in every 
character from the beach plum, and it has been long 
cultivated upon walls in Europe, a treatment which no 
one would be likely to give to the little beach plum. 
Torrey and Gray, in 1838, in the "Flora of North Amer- 
ica," do not mention the myrobalan plum. After all 
the exploration of the North American flora, no plant 
has been found which could have been the original 
of this plum ; while its early cultivation in Europe, 
together with the testimony of Clusius and other early 
herbalists, is strong presumption that it is native to 
the Old World. This conviction is increased by the 
doubt which exists in the minds of the leading bota- 
nists, from LinnaBus down, as to its systematic 
position, for if there is difficulty in separating it from 
Pninus domestica, the original of the common plum, 
and which is itself a native of the Old World and 
immensely variable, there is strong reason for suspect- 
ing that it is only an offshoot of that species ; and this 
presumption finds strong support in other direc- 
tions. One need not study far into the European 
plums until he convinces himself that the essential 
features of the myrobalan plum are present in sev- 
eral of the wild or half -wild forms of southern and 
southeastern Europe, no matter what the ultimate 
origin of the fruit may have been. In recent years a 
purple -leaved variety of this myrobalan plum has 
come into cultivation from Persia, under the name 
of Prunus Pissardi. I have no doubt, therefore, that 


the myrobalan plum is native to Europe or Asia; and 
it is fall time that an American origin be no longer 
ascribed to it. 

The myrobalan plum has long been used in this 
country as a stock for various plums. Except upon 
the Pacific coast, it appears to be falling into dis- 
repute, however, as it dwarfs the cion, and is not 
suited to all varieties. The endeavor to find some 
stock which can take the place of the myrobalan 
has resulted in the popularizing of the Marianna, 
which, if not pure myrobalan, certainly partakes 
very largely of it. The myrobalan stock is widely 
distributed in this country, and bearing trees of it 
are occasionally seen. The Golden Cherry plum of 
Downing is undoubtedly this species, and the fruit 
now known as Toungken's Golden Cherry is cer- 
tainly mjTobalan, and it is probably identical with 
the variety described by Downing. The fruits may 
be either yellow or red in various shades. They are 
round and cherry-like, with a depression at the base, 
on slender stems, ranging in size from that of a large 
cherry to an inch and a-half in diameter. The myro- 
balan is very variable, a fact which finds record and 
confirmation in the various characters of the stones, 
as shown in the illustration on page 190. 

The first variety of this Marianna or myrobalan 
type to be introduced as a native plum was the De 
Caradeuc. This is an earl}' garnet -red plum. It 
originated with A. De Caradeuc, upon his former 
farm near Aiken, South Carolina, about the years 
1850 to 1854. Mr. De Caradeuc imported some 
French plums, from the seed of which this variety 
came. There were several Chickasaw plums in the 


vicinity of the French trees, and Mr. De Caradeuc 
thinks that the variety under consideration is a 
hybrid, but I am unable to discover any evidence 
of hybridity. The original tree of the variety "out- 
grew the parent," Mr. De Caradeuc writes me, "and 
reaehed a diameter of head of fifteen feet, was 
entirely' free from thorns and suckers, and bore a 
remarkably rich and beautiful foliage." The variety 
was named by P. J. Berckmans, the excellent pomol- 
ogist of Georgia, and he regards it as pure myro- 
balan, a conclusion with which I am strongly inclined 
to concur. Another indication that it may be myro- 
balan, is the fact that J. W. Kerr, of Maryland, has 
grown a purple -leaved plum tree from a seed of the 
De Caradeuc, thus suggesting Prunus Pissardi, which 
is a purple form of the Old World myrobalan. 

The Marianna is, in several respects, intermediate 
between Prunus cerasifera^ as represented in De Cara- 
deuc, and the native American plums, particularly in 
the short-stemmed fruit, small, nearly sessile, and 
clustered, later flowers, and erect, narrow calyx lobes, 
and spreading habit. It is, therefore, little surprise 
to learn that the originator considers it a seedling of 
Wild Goose. It originated as a seedling in a mixed 
orchard at Marianna, Polk county, Texas, the property 
of Charles G. Fitzfe. So far as I can learn, the seed 
was not hand -sown, and there is a chance for error 
in the history. The variety was introduced in 1884, 
by Charles N. Eley, Smith Point, Texas. 

The Hattie and some others are of this group, but 
I have not traced the history of them. 


The Beach Plum Group 

The beach plum is a straggling, more or less 
decumbent bush, reaching three to six or even twelve 
feet in height, growing in the sands of the sea -coast 
from New Brunswick to Virginia, and perhaps extend- 
ing farther towards the Southwest ; and also near the 
head of Lake Michigan, where it has recently been 
found. The flowers are rather large for the size of 

the plant, and are borne on promi- 
nent stalks in clusters. The fruit 
(Fig. 33), is about half an inch 
in diameter in the best forms, 
and is deep, dull purple when ripe, 
and covered with a dense bloom; 
^^ the flesh is brittle, sweet and 

fly ^.^^ juicy, entirely free from the stone; 

V|(r (( ^ ^^ s^^^ ^s thick and tough, and 

\,^fr usually leaves an acrid taste in 

Fi«.33. the mouth when the fruit is eaten. 

Beach plum {Prunu, mar- jj^qx^ the Jcrscy coast the fruit 

■ itima). Full sizo . . ; 

IS ripe the middle of August. 
Frunus maritima, as this beach plum is called, is 
in cultivation as an ornamental plant, it being very 
showy when in bloom and interesting in fruit. It 
succeeds well under cultivation in the interior states. 
As a fruit plant it has given rise to but one variety, 
the Bassett's American. This variety is a third larger 
than the ordinary wild beach plum, but it does not 
differ greatly in other respects than in size. It was 
introduced about twenty years ago by Wm. F. Bassett, 
Hammonton, N. J., who bought the original tree from 
a man who found it in the neighborhood. It grows 


well npon the Wild Goose, and Mr. Bassett writes me 
that he has a tree on such roots which is fifteen feet 
high. It was brought to notice largely through the 
efforts of the Rumson nurseries, in New Jersey, where it 
was worked upon the myrobalan plum and the peach. 
I have seen a vigorous, large tree at Mr. Kerr's, in 
Maryland, grafted upon the Richland, which is Prunus 
domestica. Mr. Kerr also finds that it grows upon 
the Chickasaws. The variety has small merit. 

The beach plum type is variable, and Small has 
recently described a new species of it, Prtmus Oravesii, 
from Connecticut.* 

The ParAfic Coast Plum 

The wild plum of the Pacific coast is the nearest 
approach to the European type of any plum in the 
American flora. There is a reason for this in the 
similarity of climate of our western coast to that of 
Europe, for similar conditions develop similar plants. 
It is interesting to note, also, that the pomology of 
California — with its wine and raisin grapes, olives, 
figs, almonds, and citrous fruits — is more akin to that 
of Europe than it is to that of eastern America. 
This wild Pacific plum is Primus subcordata (Fig. 
34). It grows west of the mountains in northern 
California and southern Oregon. . The typical form 
grows either as a tall shrub or a small tree, but usu- 
ally not reaching above three to six feet high. The 
fruit varies from nearly globular to oblong, and is 
usually dark red and subacid, the flesh clinging 
tightly to the flat, smooth stone. It is usually unpalat- 

•Bull. Torr. Bot. Club, xxlv. 45. 


able, and the plant is probably not in cultivation out- 
side of botanic gardens and experimental grounds 

There is a form of this Pacific plum which produces 
attractive fruit, however. This is the so-called Sisson 
plum, bearing the name of Mr. Sisson, of Strawbeny 

in«. S4. Fsclflc coul 

valley, near the base of Mt. Shasta, who has been 
instrumental in bringing it to notice. This form is 
known as Prunus subcordata var. Eelloggii (J. G. Lem- 
mon, Pittonia, 1890, p. 67) . The tree is a taller grower 
than P. subcordata itself, the leaves less cordate, and 
the fruit larger, yellow or red, soft and palatable. 
Lother Bnrbank writes me that the twigs of yellow- 
fruited plants are greenish yellow, and those of the 
red-fruited plants are reddish brown. He also t«lls 
me that seeds of the yellow fruits may produce red 


plnms, and vice-ver8&. This Sisson plum is locally 
cultivated in parts of California, and it is thought 
by some to give promise of a -new race of plums. 

The fruits shown in the accompanying photograph, 
received from California, were light herryred, marked 
with many minute golden dots. They were depressed- 
globular, with a distinct suture, a short stem, and a 
firm, meaty, rather dry, insipid flesh, and freestones. 
Mr. Burbank sends me fruits of hybrids of this species 
with the Robinson (one of the Chickasaws), which 
are an improvement in quality. 

Wickson, in his "California Fruits," writes as fol- 
lows of the Pacific plum : "Early efforts were made to 
domesticate these wild plums, and they showed them- 
selves susceptible of improvement by cultivation to a 
certain extent. In 1856 there was on the Middle Yuba 
river, not far from Forest City, in Sierra county, 
a wayside establishment, known as ^Plum Valley 
Ranch,' so called from the great quantity of wild 
plums growing on and about the place. The plum by 
cultivation gave a more vigorous growth and larger 
fruit. Transplanted from the mountains into the valley, 
they are found to ripen earlier. Transplanted from 
the mountains to a farm near the coast, in Del Norte 
county, they did not thrive. One variety, moved from 
the hills near Petaluma, in 1858, was grown as an 
orchard tree for fifteen years, and improved both in 
growth and quality of fruit by cultivation. The atten- 
tion of fruit-growers was early drawn to the possible 
value of the wild plum as grafting stock, and it is 
rei)orted to have done fairly well on trial. Recently 
excellent results have been reported from the domesti- 
cation of the native plum in Nevada county, and fruit 


shown at the state fair of 1888 gave assurance that by 
cultivation and selecting seedlings, valuable varieties 
can be obtained. It is stated that in Sierra county the 
wild plum is the only plum which finds a market at 
good prices, and that cultivated gages, blue and egg 
plums scarcely pay for gathering. The wild plum 
makes delicious preserves." 

Various Other Types of Phims 

We have now explored all those groups or families 
of native plums which have been impressed into 
cultivation to any extent for the sake of their fruits. 
There still remain a few species whose fruits, in the 
wild state, are sufficiently palatable to attract the 
experimenter, and which should be mentioned in this 

Sand plum, — The Sand plum of Nebraska and cen- 
tral Kansas is the most important of the plums 
which we have not yet discussed. So recently has 
this plum come to be known that it has never had a 
specific name until Professor Sargent described it as 
Prunus Watso7ii^ four years ago ("Garden and Forest," 
vii. 134). It is a compact -growing bush of three or 
four feet in height, bearing a profusion of small, red- 
dish, juicy fruits (Fig. 35). The inhabitants of those 
parts of the West where this^ plum is native collect 
the better forms in large quantities for domestic con- 
sumption, and even sell the fruits in the towns. The 
plant is also occasionally transplanted to gardens. 
"The hardiness of Prunus Watsoni in regions of 
extreme cold," writes Sargent, "its compact, dwarf 
habit, abundant flowers and handsome fruit, make it 



an oraameittBl plant of first rate value and as seleo 
tion and good cultivation will doubtless improve the 
size and qualitv of the fruit it will perhap*! become 
a valuable inmate of small fruit gardens This sand 

T\a. K. Sand pi 

plum is very like the Chiekasaw plum in botanical 
characters, and I think that it is only a modified form 
of that species, the variation having been brought 
about by the dry soils and climates in which it grows. 
It differs from the Chickasaw iu its dwarfer habit, 
thicker leaves and thicker -skinned fruit, and some- 


what different stone ; but all of these characters are 
eminently variable in plums, and they seem, for the 
most part, to be the result of adaptation to habitat. 
We shall recur to this sand plum in our discussion 
of the Utah Hybrid Cherry (page 244.) 

The latest contribution to our knowledge of the 
sand plums is the following sketch by Waugh : * 

Although it is now nearly four years since Sargent distin- 
guished Prunus Watsoni from P. angustifolia (C. S. Sargent, 
Garden and Forest, vol. vii., p. 134, 1894), the individuality of 
the group does not seem to have made any very decided impres- 
sion either upon botanists or horticulturists, and material which 
ought to be referred to this species is still sometimes carelessly 
classified with the Chickasaw plums. As the group has already 
given some evidence of utility, and as it may prove of consider- 
ably greater importance in the future evolution of American 
plums, it appears to be especially desirable to have the knowl- 
edge of it clearly in the minds of plum students. 

The most striking difference between the sand plum and the 
Chickasaw is that of stature. The sand plum is distinctly a 
dwarf, seldom growing much higher than a man's head, and some- 
times reaching maturity and prolific fruitage at a height of four 
feet. Beside this, the whole dwarfish appearance is measurably 
intensified by the short -jointed, often sharply -zigzagging twigs, 
which give an effect of thorniness. These twigs are apt to be 
ash^'-gray, especially at two or three years of age. The leaves are 
smaller than those of the Chickasaw plums, and are more finely 
crenulate upon the margins, but offer no safe distinctive char- 
acters. In the most carefully prepared published descriptions of 
the two species, the few distinctions given are hard to apply. Of 
Prunus angustifolia the calyx lobes are said to be glandular-ciliate, 
while those of P. fVatsoni are described as eglandular-ciliate. 
And while all the garden and herbarium specimens of P. Watsoni 
which I have examined have shown eglandular calyx lobes, so 
have several of the cultivated varieties of Chickasaw parentage. 
The two species are evidently closely related, but one who is 

•*^The Sand Plums,*' Country Gentleman, January 27, 1898. 


aequainted with P. Watsani would seldom be tronbled in separat- 
ing them in the field. With herbarium material alone , a case of 
doubt would be hard to settle. 

The sand plums are confused In several trade catalogues, and 
in the minds of some persons who ought to keep such things 
straight, with the sand cherry, Prunua Beaseyij and still more 
seriously with the Utah Hybrid cherry, which Bailey supi>08es to 
be a hybrid of P. Besseyi and P. Watsoni, This confusion is 
entirely unnecessary, and it is to be hoped that it will quite dis- 
appear as soon as attention can be fixed upon the facts. 

The natural range of Prunus fVatsani seems to be quite cir- 
cumscribed. Sargent locates it upon ^^ sandy streams and hills, 
south and southeast Nebraska and central and western Kansas.'' 
As a matter of fact, its distribution within this limited range is 
by no means general. In Kansas, where I have been entirely 
familiar with it, the sand plum is confined almost exclusively 
to the sandy lands in the immediate valleys of the Republican 
and Arkansas rivers and their tributaries, although it is found 
more sparsely in the Smoky Hill and Kansas River valleys. 
Mason says: ^^Have not noted it east of Wabaunsee county.'' 
(S. C. Mason, "Variety and Distribution of Kansas Trees," page 
8.) The species is commonly reported from Oklahoma, but 
though I have frequently been as far west as Kingfisher and El 
Beno, I have never seen it. The dwarf sand plums which I have 
frequently found in that territory, and which I have sometimes 
seen brought to the market, were of the species Pruntis grctcilis. 
Still I think it probable that P. Watsoni grows in Oklahoma, at 
least in some of the western counties. This opinion is strength- 
ened by the introduction of undoubted varieties of this species 
from the Panhandle of Texas (see below). 

Early settlers in Kansas, before their own orchard plantings 
came into bearing, used to find the sand plums well worth their 
attention. In July and August everybody for fifty miles back 
from the Arkansas sand hills used to flock thither to pick, and it 
was an improvident or an unlucky family which came off with less 
than four or five bushels to can for winter. Whole wagon loads 
of fruit were often secured, and were sometimes offered for sale 
in neighboring towns. 

The fruit gathered from the wild trees was of remarkably fine 


qnality, considering the conditions under which it grew. The 
plums were quite uniformly large — I would say from memory that 
they often reached three -fourths of an inch to an inch in diameter. 
They were thin-skinned and of good flavor, not having the un- 
pleasant astringency of the wild Americana plums, which were also 
sometimes gathered. They were excellent for canning, and made 
the finest of jelly. In this connection I may quote F. T. Ramsey, 
nurseryman of Austin, Texas, who writes me: *^ As far back as I 
can remember, I have heard people who crossed the upper plain of 
Texas speak of the large wild plums that grew there. It seems 
that in their wild state they grew as large as a Wild Goose.'' 

Naturally, the settlers who went every year to the sand hills 
for plums brought back trees to plant in the gardens they were 
opening. Almost every farm within the range mentioned above 
had a few or many of the dwarf trees growing. Some of these 
were fruitful and worth their room, but most of them have now 
died out, or are neglected and forgotten. This is because people 
have paid no attention to their selection, propagation and culti- 
vation. Further than this, however, the sand plum has often 
failed signally to come up to its record when transferred to culti- 
vation. It seems not to adapt itself readily to a wide diversity of 
soils and conditions. 

Still, an occasional variety has been deemed worthy of 
propagation and the distinction of a name. The Bluemont was 
introduced by E. Gale, of Manhattan, Kansas, during the sixties 
(Vermont Exp. Sta. Bull. 53, p. 62, 1896). A reliable nursery- 
man of Junction City, Kansas, writes me that the Bluemont is 
considered the best variety they have for canning, but it has 
always been propagated from root -sprouts, which is a drawback 
to its widest popularity. Recently I have found four other 
varieties growing in Mr. Kerr's orchards in Maryland, which I 
have referred to this species (Vermont Exp. Sta., 10th Ann. 
Rept., p. 106, 1897). These are Strawberry, Purple Panhandle, 
Red Panhandle, Yellow Panhandle. Strawberry is mentioned 
by Bailey (Cornell Exp. Sta., Bull. 38, p. 31, 1892), who knew 
nothing of its history, and is by him put with the Chickasaws, 
as were all forms of Primus Waisoni at that time. On the same 
page where Strawberry is mentioned, the author says: *^I have 
plants from Kansas, under the name of ^Kansas Dwarf Cherry,' 


which are evidently a bush -like form of this species/' These 
must also have been Prunus fVatsoni* The varieties, Purple 
Panhandle, Red Panhandle and Yellow Panhandle, were intro- 
duced from Texas by F. T. Ramsey. Mr. Ramsey says that 
eight or nine years ago he got a quantity of stock ^^ from various 
counties in the upper Panhandle proper'' of Texas. Besides 
the varieties named, he had another called Clarendon. He says 
further: "I have been greatly disappointed in them here, and 
have dropped them from my catalogue this year, for the one reason 
that they did not g^ow large enough. This winter I have been 
surprised to have several inquiries for them from parties who 
bought them from me, on account of the enormous crops they 

It seems entirely possible that we may yet find ourselves in 
possession of some valuable varieties derived from this species, 
though no very sweeping recommendation could fairly be given 
any variety now known. 

At one time and another I have heard a good deal of talk 
about using Prunus JVatsoni as a dwarf stock for working other 
plums, but I never knew of an experiment in that line. The 
tendency to sprout from the roots would be a defect in using 
the plants for stocks. 

In Maryland, the young growth and blossoms, especially of 
Strawberry, are severely damaged by the brown -rot fungus, 
Monilia fructigena. In their original wild state, along the 
Arkansas river, they used to be free from brown -rot, black - 
knot and curculio, but I lived in that country long enough my- 
self to see them attacked by both curculio and black -knot. 

The rivularis plum. — The Towakong or Creek plum, 
of Texas, is one of which I have no personal knowl- 
edge, except from herbarium specimens. It was first 
brought to notice by the botanical collector Lind- 
heimer, and described in 1848 by Scheele as Prunus 
rivularis in "Linnasa" (xxi. p. 594). This is a bushy 
plant, three to six feet high, which Gray speaks of as 

* The Buppositioii is correct. Both the Strawberry and the Kansas form are 
Prunua Wattoni.—Jj. H. B. 


"verging to Americana." It grows on the banks of 
sti'eams and margins of bottom -woods, mostly in 
thickets. The fruit is said to be very agreeable. 
Scheele describes the fruit as the size of cherry to 
that of a mirabelle (myrobalan plum), half an inch to 
an inch thick, spherical and red. The Towakong 
Indians boil it with honey, and use it for food. 
Coulter, in his "Flora of Western Texas," says that 
this plum is "not uncommon on the Colorado and its 
tributaries and extending to the upper Guadalupe and 
the Leona." It is not in cultivation. It evidently 
bears much the same relation to the Prunus Ameri- 
cana that Prunus Watsoni does to the Chickasaw 
plum* (see pages 207, 208). 

The southern sloe, — The black sloe of the southern 
states, Prunus umbellata, attains a height of twelve to 
twenty feet, and the foliage is somewhat like narrow- 
leaved forms of the myrobalan plum. It is distributed 
in the maritime districts froin South Carolina to Texas, 
reaching north, in its southwestern ranges, to south- 
ern Arkansas. Sargent says, in his "Silva," that "the 
fruit is gathered in large quantities and is used in 
making jellies and jams." In Florida it is sometimes 
called Hog plum. Fruit sent me from that state was 
orange -yellow, with faint blushes of red, or some 
specimens pure yellow, with a thin bloom, freestone, 
very sour and bitter. A Texas correspondent writes 
that the fruit is usually unpleasant or disagreeable, 
but that an occasional form bears large and good 
fruit. Prunus umbellata is not in cultivation for its 
fruit, and it is not likely that it can compete in 

^heele'B Prunu* Texana, of which there is a duplicate type in the her- 
barinin of the MUsouii BoUnical Gardens, i8 Fnintu Amerusana. See p. 184. 



fni it -bearing merits with the Chickasaw aud hortn- 
lana plums.* 

The Alleghany plum is a small tree or straggliiie: 
hnsh, closely allied to Prumis Amprkana, which occti- 

Fla- BO. Allegbaui 

pies a very restricted range in the mountains of cen- 
tral Pennsylvania. The species was distingnished 


from the Americana plums nearly forty years ago, but 
it was not described as a distinct species until 1877, 
when Professor T. C. Porter named it Prunus Alle- 
ghaniensis. According to Sargent, "the fruit is col- 
lected in large quantities, and is made into excellent 
preserves, jellies and jams, which have a considerable 
local consumption." He holds the opinion that it 
"will probably be improved by selection and cultiva- 
tion." As I have grown the Alleghany plum, it 
makes an upright small tree, and bears rather freely 
of small, hard, spherical plums (see Fig. 36) of dark 
purple color, with a decided bloom, and acerb and 
uneatable in quality. Its merits as a fruit-bearing 
plant seem to be so inferior to those of the Ameri- 
cana plums, that I do not look for any attempt to 
ameliorate the species for many years to come. 

Note. — Persons who wish to follow the details of varieties 
and methods of cultivation of the native plums should consult 
Goff's excellent account of "The Culture of Native Plums in the 
Northwest," Bull. 63, Wis. Exp. Sta. Oct. 1897; also Waugh's 
"Pollination of Plums," Bull. 63, Vt. Exp. Sta. Aug. 1896, and 
10th Rep. Vt. Exp. Sta. 1896-7. A good account of the botany 
of plums and cherries, by Bessey, may be found in Rep. Nebr. 
Hort. Soc. 1895. See, also, Waugh, Bot. Gaz., July, 1898. 

The Native Cherries 

North America has little to attract the experi- 
menter in the way of native cherries. Most of the 
tree cherries belong to the racemose type, the flowers 
being borne in more or less elongated clusters, of which 
the lowermost — those nearest the parent shoot— open 
first. This type of cherries has never given important 
results in the amelioration of the fruits in any part 


of the world. The chief historic representative of this 
class is the Padus or bird cherry (Prunus Padus) of 
the Old World, of which our choke cherry (Prunus 
Virginiana) is the occidental congener. There are 
occasional forms of the Padus which bear fruit of 
some merit, but they are wretchedly inferior to the 
improved forms of the umbellate -flowered or garden 
cherries. Now and then one finds a choke cherry 
bush which beara more pulpy and more pleasant- 
tasted fruit than is the wont of the species, but even 
these variations offer little temptation to the cultiva- 
tor. The choke cherry is cultivated for ornament, 
however. It is scarcely inferior for that purpose 
to its Old World congener {Prunus Padus), although 
its flowers are somewhat smaller than in that species, 
and they are also a few days earlier. If grown as a 
lawn tree where a symmetrical development can be 
secured, the choke cherry, both in bloom and in 
fruit, is an attractive object. Although rarely more 
than a large tree -like bush, the choke cherry is often 
confounded with the wild black cherry, but it is 
readily distinguished by the very sharp small teeth 
of the leaves. The fruit of the choke cherry is 
commonly red, but amber -fruited plants are occasion- 
ally found.* 

The choke cherry is undoubtedly capable of some 
improvement under cultivation. Even in a wild state, 
the fruit is capable of yielding acceptable jelly. t 
Ameliorated varieties of the choke cherry are occa- 
sionally described, but there is a suspicion that 

*Prumu Virginiana var. leueoearpa, Watson. Bot. Gaz. xiii. 233. 

tSee, for example, F. A. Wangh, Garden and Forest, ix. 388, and J. E. 
TiOamed, 1. c. 408. 


some of them may be the European bird cherry, 
Primus PaduSy which is distinguished from the choke 
cherry with difficulty, and which is often grown here 
for ornament. The following extracts show to what 
extent these fruits have yet appealed to the culti- 

The Choke Cherry in Cultivation.*— Recent notes in 
"Garden and Forest," as well as other sources of information, 
seem to indicate that the choke cherry is unknown to cultivation. 
Such is not the fact, although its use is apparently limited and 
local. One of the earliest recollections of my boyhood has to do 
with two or three choke cherry trees beyond the garden in the 
edge of the old orchard, and I can almost feel their pucker yet, 
and I recall the feeling of danger when some older companion 
would utter the grave warning never to drink milk after eating 
choke cherries. These could hardly be called cultivated choke 
cherries, however, and the trees were simply spared where they 
had chanced to spring up. 

In distinct contrast with this puckering little fruit I call to 
mind another kind, always spoken of as the ** tame " choke cherry. 
The merits of this fruit may have seemed greater than the reality, 
since none of it was to be found on our own farm. Still, any boy 
would call this fruit good, and when prepared for the table, boys 
still call it good, no matter what may be their age. The botanical 
characters of the tree appear to be the same as those of the wild 
choke cherry, Prunus Virgijiianaj though the tree reaches a larger 
size than that commonly reached by the shrubs along the fence 
rows. In this cultivated form the trunk often reaches a diameter 
of from four to six inches, and the tree attains a height of fifteen 
to twenty feet. 

The fruit is much larger than in any wild forms which I have 
seen, perhaps ranging from three-eighths to half an inch in 
diameter. It also has much less astringency, and whatever 
remains of this entirely disappears with cooking. The fruit is 
much used, both for pies and sauce, and is also canned for winter 
use. Any criticism as to its quality in these forms would be that 

•Fred W. Card, Garden and Forest, x. 47 (1897). 


it lacks in pronounced flavor rather than that it posseBses any 
Btrong or unpleasant ones. It does not make a rich sauce, but 
one which is, on the whole, very cooling and agreeable. 

It is not necessary to cook the fruit in order to dispel its 
astringency. Those most familiar with its use have learned that 
when the fruit is fully ripe, if it is put into a cloth sack and rolled 
back and forth or shaken in a closed vessel, this quality disap- 
pears. Treated in this way and served with sugar and cream, like 
peaches or other fresh fruit, it is a dish by no means to be passed 
by. I do not remember that the fruit was ever used for jelly, but, 
of course, it might be and perhaps is. 

There are certain qualities possessed by this fruit which seem 
to make it worthy of being better known than it now is* In the 
first place, it ripens at a time when other cherries are gone. 
Furthermore, the tree is uniformly productive, seldom, if ever, 
failing to yield a crop. Although small, the fruit is borne in 
clusters, so that it is quickly and easily picked. It also has the 
quality of remaining a long time on the tree after ripening, which 
is a desirable feature for home use. The tree is apparently well 
able to care for itself, for all of those which I have observed have 
been growing absolutely without care. It seems, further, that it 
must have few serious enemies, otherwise it would not prove so 
uniformly productive. As to its longevity I cannot testify. 
Among the trees of my earliest remembrance several are gone, 
while others, when I last saw them, were still yielding their 
annual crop of fruit. 

The chief objection against this little recognized claimant 
for admission to our gardens is its small size, and the conse- 
quent number of pits. If the suggestion of one ot your corre- 
spondents for a pitting machine were to take tangible shape, it 
would add greatly to the importance of this fruit. Indeed, there 
seems to be no reason why such a machine should not be as 
readily devised for cherries of this size as for larger ones. It is 
possible that the same machine might answer for both, for in 
size these fruits are about intermediate between the wild choke 
cherry and the Early Richmond. As commonly served, the pits 
are left in, and in that case it becomes largely a question of 
leisure, for while they are easily removed, it takes time to 
do it. 


So far as J have learned the history of this fruit from 
inquiries made in northern Pennsylvania where I have known 
it, the original trees were brought to that region from Connecti- 
cut by one of tlie older settlers. The trees sprout from the 
roots to some extent, and these sprouts have served as a means 
of distribution in this farming community, so that it is not at 
all an uncommon fruit in that immediate vicinity. As to its 
remoter history I know nothing. Probably it is merely an 
improved form originally selected from some hedgerow. The 
variation in size of fruit which these wild groups present cer- 
tainly lends color to such a supposition. 

Craig comments on this article as follows:* 

I was very much interested in the letter of Professor Card, 
which appeared in your issue of February 3d, on "The Choke 
Cherry in Cultivation." I send you this note to corroborate the 
statement of Professor Card, and to say that in the clay flats of 
the Province of Quebec, bordering the Bichelieu and St. 
Lawrence rivers, the choke cherry is one of the principal 
fruits cultivated by the French habitant. This is owing largely 
to the character of the soil, which is of the pronounced blue- 
clay stamp and of the stickiest and most impervious type. In 
this region the choke cherry may be found in almost every 
French garden. It is cultivated mostly in tree form, and mul- 
tiplied by means of the suckers which spring up about the roots. 
A great many variations occur. Fruit large and small, light and 
dark, astringent and non- astringent, may be found. Two years 
ago I found a tree bearing large clusters of yellowish white 
cherries. I have sown the seed of these, and am watching the 
young seedlings with interest, hoping that improved forms may 
appear. The French use this fruit in many ways, but it is most 
largely partaken of uncooked, next as preserves, while a smaller 
proportion is made into jelly. The tree is hardier than the wild 
bla«k cherry, Pntnus serotina, and is found all through the 
northwest territories, even upon elevated portions of the foot- 
hills of the eastern Rockies. 

*Garden and Forest, x. 68. 


A periodical has the following sketch of improved 
choke cherries from 11. Knndson, an experimenter in 
Minnesota: "I have three improved varieties of choke 
cherry, which I have numbered 1, 2, 3. They all 
differ from the common type of choke cherry, both in 
leaf and bud, and especially in fruit. No. 3 is the 
greatest departure from the original type, and when 
its leaves are fully developed, is readily distinguished 
from any other sort by its leaves alone. Nos. 1 and 
2 are of slender, upright growth, and attain a height 
of twenty to twenty -five feet. No. 3 is of a rather 
more spreading habit. 

"They are all thrifty growers, so far free from dis- 
ease, and good annual bearers, producing the best 
fruit of its class I have ever tasted, having very little 
of the astringency common to the race. 

"There certainly appears to be an inclination in 
this fruit to break away from the original type, and 
inasmuch as they possess in a high degree those quali- 
ties that are found lacking in our cultivated varieties, 
imported from Europe; viz., health and hardiness, 
may it not be best for us to turn some of our efforts 
toward developing the native cherry, as well as the 
native plum?'' 

Upon the plains and westward, Prunus Virginiana 
is represented by Prunus demissa^ which has thicker 
leaves with less pronounced teeth, and mostly longer 
racemes of better fruit. Wickson says that in Cali- 
fornia "the wild fruit is used to some extent for mar- 
malade. It has been cultivated to some extent in 
places near its habitat." It has also been used for 
stocks for garden cherries. This western cherry was 
introduced into the plant trade in 1881 by Edward 



tiillett, Southwick, Massachusetts, as an oi-iiameDtal 

PruHHS seiotiiia, the wild blat-k, or nim cherry, 
the wood of whieh is often used for cabinet work and 
lioiise furnishing, is planted for forestry purposes, 
as &a ornamental tree, and sparingly for itR frnit 

Fla. 37. Wild bl. 

(Fig. 37). Infusions of the bark are used for medi- 
cinal purposes, and the finiit is often employed in the 
manufacture of cherry brandy, or as a flavor to rum. 
Occasional trees bear fruit of unusual size and attrac- 
tiveness, but it is doubtful if any sustained attempt 
will ever be made to develop it into a fniit plant. 
As an ornamental plant, the wild black cherry pos- 
sesses decided merits in its attractive habit, clean, shiu- 
ing folinsre, striking white racemes and handsome 
fniit. There are several cultivated varieties ; pendula, 
a weeping form, worked standard-high ; vaiiegatu, 
with leaves more or less discolored with yellow ; 


golden -leaf, found wild by Jackson Dawson, of the 
Arnold Arboretum, and somewhat disseminated, and 
probably essentially the same as variegata; carthagena, 
with small, short -elliptic or ovate -elliptic leaves. 
Prunus serotina ranges through the eastern and 
southern states as far west as Kansas. 

Primus Pennsylvanica, the bird, wild red, pigeon 
or pin cherry, is occasionally cultivated for ornament, 
although it is not so well known as its merits 
deserve. It sprouts badly, a feature which no doubt 
discourages its dissemination. The species has been 
lately recommended as a stock for the common orchard 
cherries. The union with the orchard cherries, both 
sweet and sour, appears to be good as a rule, and the 
species certainly possesses promise as a cheap and 
hardy stock in climates too rigorous for the ordinary 
cherry stocks. The fruit is sometimes used in the 
preparation of cough mixtures, but is never edible. 
It is generally distributed throughout the northern 
half of the Union from the Atlantic to Colorado. 

The Dwarf Cherry Group 

There is one well marked group of native cherries 
which seems to be destined to play an important part 
in the evolution of American fruits. This includes 
two or three bush cherries. They are just now begin- 
ning to attract the attention of experimenters, and 
already hybrids between one of them and the true 
plums have been produced. It is fortunate that the 
history of the group is now written, before it has 
become so profoundly modified by domestication that 
it is not necessary to invoke speculation to determine 


the genesis of garden forms. And yet even here, 
upon the very threshold of their introduction into 
domestic gardens, we shall find certain points which 
can be understood or explained only by inference. 

These dwarf cherries are the American congeners 
of the ground or dwarf cherry of Europe and north- 
ern Asia, which is known as Prunus Chamcecerasus^ 
and which is in cultivation in this country for orna- 
ment. This European plant is so like our own that 
it has received the name of Prunus pumila — which is 
the American plant— from nurserymen who have been 
instrumental in disseminating it. There are two 
species of dwarf cherry which are concerned in this 
contemporaneous evolution, but only one of them 
seems to promise much under domestication. These 
are the sand cherry {Prunus pumila, Pig. 38), and 
the western dwarf cherry (Prunus Besseyi, Fig. 39). 
The history of this dwarf cherry group was first writ- 
ten by the present author less than four years ago 
("The Native Dwarf Cherries;" Bulletin 70 of the 
Cornell Experiment Station), and it was upon that 
occasion that the western plant was separated from 
the eastern plant, and designated as Prunus Besseyi, 
in compliment to Professor Charles E. Bessey, of the 
University of Nebraska, who has often called attention 
to the merits of the fruit. 

Of these two cherries, the better known to bota- 
nists is the common dwarf or sand cherry of the East, 
Prunus pumila, which grows chiefly upon sandy and 
rocky shores from northern Maine to the District of 
Columbia and northwestward to Lake of the Woods. 
It is abundant among the Great Lakes, where it often 
grows in drifting sand. The plant is strictly erect 


when jouiig, but. with age the base or trunk be- 

eonios reclined, and often covered with sand ; but 

the young growth maintains its erect character. The 

plant has long and narrow, sharply -toothed leaves 
and a willow-like habit. This sand cherry is variable 
iu its wild state, especially in its fruit. As a rule, the 
fruit is small and very sonr and scarcely edible, but 
now and then one comes upon a bnsh which has fruit 
of pleasant flavor, and as large as small Early Rich- 


mond cherries. The illustration, Fig. 38, shows the 
ordinary type of fruit of the sand cherry, nearly natu- 
ral size. The fi-uit is ordinarily black, always without 
bloom, and in New York ripens late in July and early 
in August. It is very abundant on the sand dunes of 
Lake Michigan, where it makes a shrub from five to 
ten feet high, and bears very profusely of variable 
fruits. Some of these natural varieties are large, 
sweet and palatable, and at once suggest an effort to 
ameliorate them. The fact that the plant grows in 
the lightest of sand suggests its use for poor or arid 
regions, which are present in most states, and upon 
which few or no crops can be grown with profit. This 
cherry was advertised in the Midway Plaisance at 
the World's Fair, 1893, by Martin Klein & Co., of 
Detroit. The plant was said to have probably come 
from Japan, but it was the ordinary Primus pumila 
of our eastern states. The plant was recommended 
chiefly, it seems, for some medicinal virtue which was 
said to reside in its red roots, although its merits as 
a fruit plant were not overlooked. Unfortu natch', 
there are no named varieties of this sand cherry on 
the market, and very little attention has been given 
to it by experimenters. It has less merit as a fruit 
plant than the next species, but it is nevertheless 
worth attempts at improvement. 

The western sand or bush cherry (P. Besseyi) grows 
on the plains from Manitoba to Kansas, and westward 
to the mountains of Colorado and Utah. It is in culti- 
vation as the Improved Dwarf Rocky Mountain cherry, 
introduced in 1892 by Charles E. Pennock, of Bell- 
vue, Colorado. It has received attention at many ex- 
periment stations. This species is a dwarfer and more 


compact and bushy plant than the sand cherry, and 
it has a denser and better foliage. The cherries are 
frequently as large as those of the Early Richmond, 
and are often very palatable. The fruits are variable 
in shape, from nearly globular to oblong- pointed. It 
is from this species that the best results are to be 
expected in a horticultural way; and from the fact 
that it gi'ows over such a great area of the interior 
plains, I expect that it will be found to adapt itself 
to most trying soils and situations. 

This dwarf cherry is not mentioned in the Rocky 
Mountain botanies, although there can be no doubt 
that it is wild in Colorado and Utah. Dr. C. C. 
Parry collected it in eastern Colorado in 1867, and 
apparently the same was found somewhere in the 
Rocky Mountains, presumably in Colorado, in 1888, 
by S. M. Tracy. It was collected even so long ago 
as 1839 by Geyer, in Nicollet's famous expedition, 
being found on "arid sandy hillsides of the upper 
Missouri." I remember with great distinctness, that 
a "Rocky Mountain cherry" grew in my father's yard 
from my earliest boyhood. Pits were brought by a 
friend from Pike's Peak in an early day. As the 
western botanies do not mention any dwarf cherry, I 
had always been puzzled over this friend of my 
earlier years. 

The horticultural history of the plant seems to 
begin with A. S. Fuller's "Small Fruit Culturist," 
1867. Mr. Fuller mentions having collected the sand 
cherry (the true Primus puniila) upon Hat Island, in 
Lake Huron, in 1846. But he also had this western 
species. "A few years ago," he writes, "through the 
kindness of Professor George Thurber, I received some 


cherry seed from Utah Territory." He raised plants 
from these seeds, and noticed that the plants were dif- 
ferent from those which he had found upon Hat 
Island. "I do not consider this cherry of any par- 
ticular value as it is found in its normal condition," 
he continues; "but if we could obtain an improved 
variety of a similar growth, and as hardy and pro- 
ductive, it would certainly be a great acquisition. 
There is no reason why this should not be accom- 
plished, for, as I have said, it is nearly related to our 
cultivated varieties, and a hybrid can, and probably 
will be, produced between them." Now, after the 
lapse of a quarter of a century, the fulfillment of this 
generous prophecy is in sight. 

In 1888, Gipson, in "Horticulture by Irrigation," 
speaks of the wild native Colorado dwarf cherry as 
bearing a fruit "especially valuable for pies and pre- 
serves, and is often pleasant to eat from the hand. 
It is wonderfully productive, and will survive all 
changes and vicissitudes of the most exacting cli- 
mate." In 1889, Professor C. E. Bessey called the 
attention of the American Pomological Society to it 
as "a promising new fruit from the plains" of Ne- 
braska. It is only within the last five or six years, 
however, that the sand cherries have come into actual 
cultivation for their fruit, although as ornamental 
plants they have been sold many years. Professor C. 
A. Keffer described a dwarf cherry in 1891, in a bul- 
letin of the South Dakota Experiment Station, and a 
little later Professor Green, of Minnesota, did the same. 
Both men had grown it, and found it to be variable 
and promising. In South Dakota plants set three 
years bore heavily the second and third years. The 


"fruit begins to ripen the first week in August. The 
cherries on most of the bushes were ripe by August 
20, and some few last into September, showing a sea- 
son of from four to six weeks in a seedling planta- 
tion. Classifying roughly according to the fruit, we 
find yellow and black-fruited sorts. The yellow- 
fruited sorts, as a class, are earlier than the blacks, 
and of rather better flavor. They are greenish yellow 
when fully ripe, and vary in size, the largest being 
about the size of a medium Early Richmond cherry." 
The fruits vary greatly in flavor, some being entirely 
worthless, while others were acceptable for some culi- 
nary purposes. "While of little value when the 
qualit}"^ of the fruit is considered, it would seem that 
these dwarf cherries should give rise to a race espe- 
cially adapted to the Northwest. They have withstood 
all the dry weather of the past three years without 
injury, and they have been covered with bloom for 
two seasons, though unprotected during the winter." 
Professor Green, in Minnesota, had "fruit varying in 
color from quite light red to almost black, and in 
form from round -oblate to oval. The largest fruit 
we have is oval, with thi'ee- fourths inch and five- 
eighths inch diameters, while one other is round and 
eleven -sixteenths of an inch in diameter; this is 
nearly as large as the Early Richmond cherry. The 
quality varies greatly, some being a mild, not dis- 
agreeable subacid, others insipid, and still others very 
astringent. * * * When cooked it makes a nice 
sauce. The period of ripening varies from July 24 
to August 15. A peculiarity of the plant is that all 
the fruit on any plant is ripe at nearly the same time, 
and can nil be gathered at one picking. * * * i 


consider this cherry not only of prospective value 
for its fruit, but of immediate value as a hardy 

Professor Budd and others suggest its use as a 
dwarf stock for cherries, while it is found to grow 
well, for a time, at least, upon the peach. Finally, 
Charles E. Pennock, of Bellvue, Colorado, introduced 
the "Improved Dwarf Rocky Mountain cherry," a 
description and history of which follow, made in 1892, 
by the present writer, in his "Cultivated Native Plums 
and Cherries" (Bulletin 38, Cornell Experiment Sta- 
tion) : 

Mr. Pennock's "Improved Dwarf Rocky Moun- 
tain cherry" is the only named cultivated form, so 
far as I know, of pure Prunus Besseyi. His first 
account of this fruit, as given in the "American 
Farm and Horticulturist" for April, 1892, is as fol- 
lows : "I have never seen a bush more than four feet 
high. They should be planted about eight feet apart, 
as they grow on the ground. The first I ever saw or 
heard of it was in 1878. I was making and floating 
railroad ties down the Cache la Poudr6 river, in the 
mountains, about eight miles from my present farm. 
I thought at that time they were the most valuable 
fruit I ever saw growing wild. I got a start of these 
cherries, and have been improving them by planting 
seed (pits) of the best fruit. They vary somewhat in 
size, flavor, and season of ripening, and are capable 
of great improvement. I have known only one bush 
that was not good in my experience with it. We 
have nearly all kinds of fruit, but we like the cherry 
to eat out of hand when fully ripe better than any of 
its season. It ripens a month later than Morello — 


in fact, I picked them off the bushes and exhibited 
at our county fair September 23, 24 and 28, where 
they attracted a great deal of attention. I have 
learned since I have had these cherries that other 
residents of the county had them in their gardens 
more than twenty years ago, and have them j^et, so 
I do not claim to be the discoverer of them, but I 
believe I am the first to improve them and make 
their value known to the public. They are very 
scarce in their wild state here. There are two kinds 
of them — one that grows outside the mountains in the 
foot-hills, and is in every way inferior to the one 
that grows near the bank of the Cache la Poudre 
river. There are not 2,000 of these cherries of mine 
in existence. I could sell wagon loads of these 
cherries at 10 cents per quart. I have kept 200 of 
the young trees, which I intend to send to respon- 
sible parties who desire them for testing. The young 
trees I have are one year from seed. I have had 
them loaded down at two years of age from seed. 
They have never failed to bear fruit every year ; late 
frosts never affect them ; they are entirely hardy, 
having endured 40 degrees below zero without injury ; 
ripen when all others are gone ; would grace any 
lawn when in blossom ; are easier pitted than other 

Bessey writes as follows of the merits of this 
cherry:* "No native fruit appears more promising 
than this. Even in a wild state it is very prolific, 
and when fully ripe it is edible in the uncooked state. 
The astringency which is present in the unripe fruits 
almost or entirely disappears at maturity. Plants 

♦Rept. Nebr. Hort, Soc. 1895, 1C8. 


appear to differ a good deal in the amount of astrin- 
geucy, as well as in the size and shape of the chemes 
whi(^Ii they bear. In many parts of the state the 
sand cherry has been transplanted to the garden or 
orchard. Wherever this has been done the results 
have been encouraging. The plants become larger, 
and the cherries are larger and more abundant. They 
root freely from layers, and hence are propagated with 
the greatest ease. My i tudies of this interesting 
native cherry, supplemented by the testimony of 
numerous observers in all parts of the state where it 
grows, lead me to the conclusion that we have here 
a fruit which needs only a few years of cultivation 
and selection to yield ua a most valuable addition to 
our small -fruit gardens. It has recently attracted the 
attention of cultivators in the states eastward as a 
promising stock upon which to graft or bud some of 
the more tender varieties of the cultivated cherries of 
the Old World." 

The efforts to improve Prnnus Besseyi by means 
of crossing have been made chiefly in Minnesota. 
Professor S. B. Green, of the Minnesota Experiment 
Station, writes (1894) that he has "raised probably five 
thousand seedlings in the last four years, and has seen 
many seedlings on the grounds of the Jewell Nursery 
Co., at Lake City, Minn. 'Among these I have seen 
many that produce very good fruit, but I have not 
yet selected the one which I shall propagate. I have 
attempted quite a number of hybrids between it and 
Prnnus Americana ^ but have so far failed to get one 
that I felt sure represented both species. It is a very 
good stock for the P. Americana. It suckers very 
freely the first season, but when the graft or bud gets 


a good start there is but little trouble from this 
cause. The Russian cherries bud on it fairly well, 
but do poorly when grafted. I think the round fruits 
are much more often of good quality than those hav- 
ing a pointed apex." Mr. C. W. H. Heideman, of 
New Ulm, Minnesota, has been at work about ten 
years in endeavoring to secure crosses of Prunus 
hortidana (as the Miner) upon Prunus Besseyi^ with 
good success. He informs me that all his pollinations 
are made upon emasculated and protected flowers. 
He has made some five hundred distinct crosses, some 
of them with pollen of Prunus Americana, but the 
issues of this latter combination "are all very weak, 
and I am afraid," he writes, "that they will not pull 
through." It is yet too early to determine what the 
practical results of these crosses may be, but I am 
looking for something useful for the Northwest and 
for many of the dry lands of the East. A hybrid of 
these species is shown natural size in Pig. 40. It 
is an oblong dull red plum, with rather meaty and 
sweet flesh, a sourish skin, and a rather large stone. 
The Compass cherry, being introduced by H. Knud- 
son, is said to be a hybrid of this cherry with 
Prunus hortulana,^ 

Perhaps the most interesting of these derivatives 
of the western dwarf cherry is the variety known 
as the "Utah Hybrid cherry" (Fig. 41). All botani- 
cal evidence goes to show that the plant is a hy- 
brid of Prunus Besseyi and the sand plum, P, Wat- 
soni ; and its history t bears out this statement. 

'Consult Minn. Horticnlturist. Apl. 1896. 132, and Oct. 1896. 416. 

tFirst idven in "The Xntivo Dwarf OherrieR," Bull. 70, Cornell Exp. Sta., 
1894. By Dieck, the plant has been named Prunu9 Utahensit. 



The Black Utah ■ Hybrid cUerrj',— which, I think, 
is the one iiow iu cultivation, — originated with 
J. E. Johnson, now deceased, at Wood River, Ne- 
braska, on or near tha Platte river, probably some 

FlE. 40. Hf brill 

ollta Ibe Mioer plun 

time in the sixties. Mr. Johnson grew native dwarf 
cherries and sand plums in his garden. Seeds of 
these cherries were sown. Only one tree of the origi- 
nal batch of cherry seedlings was considered worthy 
of attention, and this tree was propagated. Mr. 
Johnson soon afterwards moved to Utah, from 
whence, it appears, he distributed this variety as the 
Utah Hybrid cherry. There is no species of plum 
or cherry known to which this Utah Hybrid can 


he teftii-eil, aad It U probable 
that it is a uatural hybrid be- 
tween the cherries and plums 
growiug iu Mr, Johnson's gar- 
den. It is an almost exact in- 
termediate between the western 
dwarf cherry and the sand plnm. 
The fi'uits are cherry-like in 
form and in the ehai-aeter of 
pit, but they have the 
"bloom" of the plum. The 
illustration shows the Utah 
Tlvbi'id, half natural t^ize, 
as grown by myself. 
It "is a very hand- 
some fruit of deep 
mahogany color, with 
a light plum-lUie 
itaffjFi bloom, ripening about 

'^r the first of August 

nt Itliaea. The qual- 
ity is poor. The 
flesh is soft and 
juicy, and rather 
pleasant, but it 
lacks body ; and the 
skin, in our speci- 
mens, is verj- bitter. 
The pit is very like 
that of Pnmus Bes- 
scyi. The plant is a 
tree -like bnsh three 
or four feet high, 


with a tendency, evidently derived from the sand plum, 
to make a zigzag growth of shoots. The foliage has 
every appearance of being a combination of the dwarf 
cherry and the sand plum. The leaves are slightly 
trough -shaped, or conduplicate, as they hang on the 
plant, while those of the sand plum are strongly 
conduplicate, and those of the cheriy are perfectly 
flat. In outline, the leaves are oblong- ovate. They 
are dull glossy above and much reticulated be- 
neath, with rather coarse, obtuse serratures, and a 
firm, thick texture. 

The Utah Hybrid cheiTy, as I have grown it, 
appears to possess no immediate value, because of the 
poorness of its fruit ; but the tree is hardy and pro- 
ductive, and it indicates that there may be combina- 
nations of dwarf plums and cherries which shall have 
distinct horticultural merits, particularl}' for dry or 
arid soils and trying situations. It also shows how 
evanescent is the line of demarcation between the 
cherry and the plum. 


We have now traced in some detail the curious 
and intricate history of the evolution of cultivated 
varieties of our native plums and cherries. We have 
seen that, although the varieties already named and 
impressed into domestication number something like 
two hundred, the greater part of them have been 
merely fortuitous or accidental variations, and that the 
history of even the oldest of them runs back scarcely 
more than three -fourths of a century, whereas most 
of them are very recent. Five accepted species or 


types of native plums and one or two of native cher- 
ries have entered into this domesticated flora, and 
hybrids have appeared not only between native plums, 
but probably between native and foreign species, and 
between the native plum and the peach ; and hybrids 
have even arisen between the plum and the cherry. Of 
late years, too, another and distinct species of plum has 
been introduced from Japan. It is attracting attention 
from fruit-growers in every part of the Union, and is 
slowly adapting itself to the new environments, and 
it must soon meet and blend with some of the native 
species. There are already reports that such nuptials 
have been made. A half dozen native species not 
yet brought into cultivation are inviting the attention 
of the experimenter. In the meantime, the interest in 
commercial plum culture is increasing rapidly, and 
the enterprise is each year carried into new and 
untried regions. Of all the books which have been 
written upon American horticulture, not one of any 
consequence has been given wholly to the plum. To 
the student, our native and domestic plum flora will 
long remain the most inviting, perplexed and virgin 
field in American pomology. 



Five types of native apples are known in the United 
States. These are, the common wild crab of the 
northeastern states and Canada, the narrow -leaved 
crab of the middle and southern states, the prairie- 
states crab, the Soiilard crab, and the Oregon crab. 
None of these are of sufficient merit to have attracted 
much attention for their fruits, from the early settlers, 
although many early narrators mention them. John 
Smith saw "some few Crabs, but veiy small and 
bitter," upon coming to Virginia. Strachey records : 
" Crabb trees there be, but the fruict small and bitter, 
howbeit, being graflfed upon, soone might we have of 
our owne apples of any kind, peares, and what ells." 
The crabs of the eastern states are mentioned and 
described by many early naturalists and botanists, but 
these records contain so little of prophecy for the fruit, 
or even interest in it for food purposes, that we do 
not need to examine them. The European apples were 
so much superior, and thrived so well upon introduc- 
tion into the New World, that the wild crabs offered 
little reward in the comparison. 

What man neglected to perform for himself, nature 
did for him, for there have now come into existence 
certain named and worthy varieties of apples which 
have sprung from the native stock. Before enquiring 
of the history of these varieties, however, it will be 



necessary to take a brief survey of the various indige- 
nous stocks. 

The Indigenous Species 

We will first simplify our account by disposing of 
the Oregon crab, since it is not in cultivation for its 
fruit. This species ranges from Alaska to northern 
California. It is the largest -growing species of native 
apple, making a tree twenty-five to forty feet high. It 
received its name, Pyrus rivularis — the "creek Pyrus" 
— from Douglas in 1833. The species is more like 
the Old World apples, especially the Siberian crab, 
than our other indigenous apples. The leaves are 
ovate and apple-like in shape, usually smooth, and 
only rarely notched or lobed, but uniformly finely 
serrate. The little fruits are oblone:, three -fourths 
inch or less long, with a scant, dryish flesh, and yel- 
low or reddish in color, ripening in September and 
October. The calyx falls before the fruit is fully ripe, 
as it does in the Siberian crab. According to Sar- 
gent, "the fruit, which has a pleasant subacid flavor 
when fully ripe, is gathered and consumed by the 
Indians." He quotes Robert Brown as follows: "The 
fruit of the crab-apple {Pyrus rivularis) is prepared 
for food by being wrapt in leaves and preserved in 
bags all winter. When the apples have become sweet, 
they are cooked by digging a hole in the ground, 
covering it over thickly with green leaves and a layer 
of earth or sand, and then kindling a flre above 
them." Wickson, in his "California Fruits," speaks 
of specimens of this crab tree "with bodies one foot 
in diameter, with spreading tops, loaded with small, 


oval fruit, of a golden color when ripe." He adds 
that the fruit of this Oregon crab " is eaten by Indians, 
and was used in early times for jelly making by the 
white settlers." 

The wild apples of the Mississippi valley and 
eastward have usually been distinguished into two 
species, the Pyrus coronaria or garland crab of the 
North, and the Pyrus angustifolia or narrow-leaved 
crab of the South. Within the last generation or two, 
botanists and experimenters have occasionally called 
attention to these crabs as the possible parents of 
improved varieties, but nothing very definite appears 
to have been put on record until the present writer 
made an essay in this direction a few years ago 
("American Garden," August, 1891), in which two 
new species or types of Pyrus were proposed, and in 
which an effort was made to discover the botanical 
features of certain cultivated forms of them. At this 
point we must examine the botanical features of the 
two old-time species of eastern crabs, and of the 
prairie states crab, which was there proposed as a 
distinct species. 

1. The wild or garland crab of the northeastern 
states {Pyrus coronaria^ Linnaeus). Leaves short- 
ovate to triangular-ovate, sharply cut-serrate and often 
3-lobed, thin and hard, smooth, on long and slender 
but stiff and hard, smooth petioles ; flowers large (over 
an inch across), on long (1% to 2 inches) and slender, 
stiff, smooth or very nearly smooth pedicels, the calyx 
smooth, or very nearly so, on the outside. A small, 
slow-growing and spreading, thorny tree, growing in 
glades from New York to Michigan, and even to Mis- 
souri and Kansas and southwards, probably, to Georgia. 


It is in cultivation as au ornamental plant V^Pyrus 
coronaria odoraia^^), but it appeare never to have been 
grown for the economic uses of its fruit. The fruit 
is always distinctly flattened endwise, clear yellowish 
green at maturity, without spots or dots ; stem very 
slender, but varying in length, the cavity small and 
regular ; basin (at apex of fruit) symmetrical, rather 
deep but broad, and marked by regular corrugations, 
the calyx small and smooth. Various aspects of this 
crab apple are shown in Figs. 42-45. 

2. The wild or narrow-leaved crab of the Southern 
states (Pyrus angusfifolia, Aiton). Leaves lanceolate- 
oblong to elliptic, small, varying from almost entire 
in the infloi*escence to bluntly and mostly sparsely 
dentate -serrate, obtuse or bluntish (only rarely half- 
acute), stiflf and firm and polished above, as if half- 
evergreen, on short (usually an inch or less) and 
hard, smooth or nearly smooth petioles ; flowers habit- 
ually smaller than in the last, on very slender but 
shorter, smooth pedicels, the calyx smooth, or essen- 
tially so, on the outside. A small, hard-wooded tree, 
growing from Pennsylvania to Tennessee (and south- 
ern Illinois?) and Florida. Dr. Gattinger, of Nash- 
ville, Tenn., writes me that the species is "confined 
to the siliceous sub -carboniferous formation, and I 
have never seen it on the silurian limestones around 
Nashville." Pyrus angustifolia is more easily confused 
with P. coronaria than the western forms of crabs are. 
The best character of distinction between P. angusti- 
folia and P. coronaria^ it seems to me, is the thick, 
half -evergreen, shining leaves of the former — a char- 
acter which appears to have been omitted in the later 
books. I presume that it was this character of leaves 

Fl|. K. The mrlaiid cmb. Fyi 



which led Desfontaine to call the species Malus sem- 
pereiretts, "evergreen crab apple." Pyrus angusfifolia 
is thus characterized by Torrey aud Gray iu 1848, aad 
the description is excellent: "Leaves lanceolate- oblong, 
often acute at base, dentate -serrate or almost entire, 
glabrous, shining above." It is said that the styles 

in Pyrvs angnstlfolui arc distinct, while they are united 
in P. corattarui, but this character does not hold. The 
coherence of the styles in ail these wild crabs, as in 
the apple itself, is very variable, and it seems to me 
to be entirely unreliable as a distinguishing mark. 
These species have been confused from the earliest 


times. For example, Michaux left two specimens of 
Pyrus angustifolia in his herbarium at Paris, one 

of which is ticketed Mains 
angustifolia and the other 
Malus coronariay — the latter 
said to grow in "Pennsyl- 
vania et Virginia." 

Pyrus coronaria 
and P. angustifolia 
are essentially smooth 
species, and the young 
wood is dense and 
hard. The young 
^leaves and 
'^'shoots are some- 
Mimes thinly 
/hairy, but they 
soon become 
smooth. The 
western types are 
essentially pubescent 
species, and the 
young growth is 
thicker and softer ; 
and the pubescence 
is floccose or woolly, 
and persists upon the 
under surface of the 
leaves throughout the 
3. The prairie states crab (Pyms loensis, Bailey, 
Amer. Gard. xii. 473. Pyrus coronaria, var. loensis. 
Wood, CI. Bk. Botany, 333, 1860). Leaves rather 

Fig. 45. 
liOiif of Pyrua coronaria. 



large, firm in texture and wliite-pul>eBcent beneath, on 
Btout and rather thick, pubescent petioles (1 to 1% 
inches long) , varions in shape : those in the flower- 
clusters are oblong and blnnt and marked above the 
middle by notches, while the mature leaves range from 
elliptic -oblong to ovate- 
oblong, and are irregu- 
larly and mostly bluntly- 
toothed, and beiiriug a 
few nothes or right- 
angled lobes or teeth 

Fla. 46, Lenvtt of Ptimi lotntU. 

(See Fig. 46); flowers nearly or quite as large as in 
P. coronaria, on rather slender but white-pubeseeut 
pedicels an inch or so long (Fig. 47). A small tree, 
growing in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Iowa, Mis- 
souri and Kansas. The fruit is characteristically dif- 
ferent from that of Puriis coronaria, and these differ- 
ences are well shown in tlie accompanying illustra- 
tions. The fruits of this species (Fig. 48) are oblong, 
dull, rather heavy green, with many light-colored dots 


in the skin ; st«m short and thick as eonipai-ed with 
fruits of P. coroiiaria, the cavity mostly obliqae or 
uiisymmetrieal ; basin variable, narrower and shallower 
than in the other, with less uniform corrugations, the 

calyx closed aud pubescent. The fruit is generally 
more angular aud irregular iu shape than that of 
P. coronarhi, averaging larger, and often has a gte&sy 

feel ; not so handsome as tiie other. 

The only description of this prairie states crab, as 


distinct from the eastern crab, which I have ever found, 
is Wood's characterization of as it P. coronaria, var. 
loensiSj in 1860, as follows: "Lvs. (when young), 
pedicels and calyx densely tonientous. Lvs. ovate and 
oblong, distinctly lobed ; (fr. not seen). Sent from 
Iowa by Dr. Cousens." Pyrus loensis is a variable 
species. The leaves on young and strong shoots 
are sometimes triangular- ovate, but the blunt teeth, 
thick petioles and white tomentum distinguish them 
from P. coronaria, the leaves of which upon similar 
shoots are very sharp-toothed. The flower- clusters and 
accompanying foliage, barring the white pubescence, 
are often much like P. angusfi folia. It is not improb- 
able that it ma}' be found to simulate P. coronaria 
upon its eastern limits. I am convinced that this 
prairie states crab is sufficiently distinct from the east- 
ern crab to be held as a valid species. It has a nor- 
mal range, marked technical })otanical features, and 
a very distinct fruit. Figs. 46-48 are characteristic. 

In their native and unmixed state, the fruits of 
these wild crabs offer little promise to the horticul- 
turist. In newly settled localities they are sometimes 
gathered for winter use, but they are then used in 
cookery, although I have known of the fruit of Pyrus 
coronaria being buried until spring, when it becomes 
fairly edible, when other fruit is not to be had. Cider 
has also been made from these wild crabs. Sargent 
says of Pyrus coronaria : "The fruit is used for pre- 
serves, and is often manufactured into cider;" and 
the same remark is made of P. angusfifolia. Hum- 
phrey Marshall, over a hundred years ago, speaks of 
the fruit of Pyrus coronaria as "small, hard, roundish, 
umbilicated, and extremely acid. It is frequently 


used for conserves, &c." But if the native crabs lack 
in attractive qualities of fruit, they make good the 
deficiency in beauty and fragrance of flowers. They 
are amongst the choicest of native small tress for 
ornamental planting. There is also a double -flowered 
form (probably of Pyrus loensis), introduced to the 
trade in 1893 as "BechtePs Double -flowering Crab." 

Amelioration Has Begun 

If the forms or types of native crabs ended here, 
the matter would be simple enough ; but there are 
certain large -fruited kinds which have been picked 
up in the Mississippi valley and introduced into cul- 
tivation, and three or four of them have received trade 
names. We must now make an effort to understand 
their botanical features and histories. The most 
important of these crabs, which have been found in 
the wild, is the Soulard (Figs. 49, 50). This Soulard 
crab has been much talked about, and yet there ap- 
pears to be little definite information concerning it, 
particularly in reference to its botanical characters. 
The fruit was named for Hon. James G. Soulard, 
of Galena, Illinois, who introduced it. The follow- 
ing account of its origin was given before the Hor- 
ticultural Society of Northern Illinois by Mr. Soulard 
in 1869 ; and the same facts are also given by him 
in "Gardener's Monthly," x. 199 (July, 1868): 

"At the request of the Horticultural Society of Jo 
Daviess county. 111., I proceed to give a statement of 
this remarkable hybrid. It originated on a farm 
about twelve miles from St. Louis, Mo., where stood 
an American crab thicket not enclosed, near the farm 


bouse, about 25 years since. Tlif thicket was cut 
down and the ground cultivated some two oi- three 
years ; culture heiiig discontinued, auother crali 
thicket sprang up, and when bearing, one tree (the 

identical kind now culled Koulard crab) was dis- 
covered. The fruit astonished me by its remarkably 
large size, being seat to me by a friend whose 
widowed mother, Mrs. Freeman Dclauriere, occupied 
the fann. I immediately propagated by grafting upon 
crab stock and upon our eouimon seedling. Upon 


both stocks producing the same fruit and thriving 
admirably, I disseminated it among my friends as a 
very desirable fruit, having nothing of the Siberian 
type. It is to me conclusive that this crab is the off- 
spring of an accidental hybridization of the wild crab 
by our common apple. The tree, its foliage, habit, 
increased size of fruit and tree, and decreased acer- 
bity, convince me it is a hybrid, and as far as I know, 
the first instance of such cross. 

"I consider it the most desirable of all crabs that 
I have seen. Adding sweetness, it is delicious baked. 
It makes most excellent preserves, being large enough 
to be quartered, and unsurpassed by any crab for 
jams, jellies, etc., imparting its delicate taste and 
rich crab aroma. The largest have measured over 
seven inches around. In form, color and smell it is 
like the common crab, and it hangs on the tree until 
destroyed by frost. It will keep two years, with com- 
mon care, in a cellar, and will stand repeated freezing 
and thawing in a dark place. It is agreeable to many 
palates in the spring. 

"The tree is an immense grower in the nurserj^ 
coming early into fruit and making but little growth 
afterwards, and is an immense and regular bearer. I 
have made some cider as clear as wine, with sugar or 
a quarter part of sweet apples. It will make delicious 
strong cider. Tree perfectly hardy, having stood the 
severest winters here and at St. Paul, Minn., for 25 
years. I have none for sale, and never expect to dis- 
pose of any ; I am too old. But I believe that there 
is money in it for younger ones." 

Downing, in the first Appendix to his "Fruits and 
Fruit Trees," says that the Soulard crab originated 


with Autoine Lessieur, Portage des Sioux, a few miles 
above St. Louis, Missouri. Confusion appears to have 
arisen from the fact that a seedling apple raised 
at Galena by Mr. Sonlard has been distributed as the 
Soulard apple. And some writers have said that the 
Soulard apple came from St. Louis, and the Soulard 
crab from Galena. Downing was confused on these 
fruits, and other writers have added to the perplexity. 
In "American Gardening" for April, 1893, a correct 
description and figure of the Soulard apple are given, 
but the confusion respecting the origin is still per- 

There is a great difference of opinion concerning 
the value of the Soulard crab, due in large part to a 
misconception of its merits. It must be remembered 
that it is a crab apple, and is' not to be compared 
with eating apples. As a crab, it appears to possess 
some advantages, particularly as a possible parent of 
a new race of fruits for the West. Professor Budd 
speaks of it as follows, in "Rural Life:" "The only 
value of the Soulard crab known to the writer is for 
mixing sparingly with good cooking apples for sauce, 
to which it imparts a marked quince flavor, which 
most persons like. It is also said to make a jelly 
superior to that of the Siberian crabs." D. B. Wier, 
for many years a fruit-grower in Illinois, writes me 
as follows concerning it: "It is simply a variety of 
the common wild crab of the northern United States. 
Its fruit is quite large for the type, smooth, round, 
somewhat elongated, and of a clear, bright, golden 
yellow when ripe ; and it keeps with little loss, with 
care, until spring, when it becomes, we may say, 
nearly eatable. The fruit, like the type generally, is 


very fragrant, and, cooked with plenty of sugar, it 
makes a most delicious preserve or sweet-meat, highly 
prized by the pioneer housewife. The tree is a fine 
pyramidal grower, rather ornamental in form, leaf and 
flower. It is propagated by root-grafting on seed- 
lings of the common apple. With me in Illinois it 
was not fully hardy, our severe test winters reducing 
its vitality plainly. I could not recommend the 
Soiilard crab as being a fruit of much value. With 
me it was for many years a scanty bearer. It is a 
rather fine ornamental tree, and did not have the 
suckering habit, which would make most of the 
varieties of the species nuisances in the garden." 
J. S. Harris, of La Crescent, Minn., gives me these 
notes of it : " The Soulard crab was introduced 
here about thirty years since, as being a cross 
between Pyrus coronaria and the common apple ; as 
hardy, fruitful and a good substitute for the quince, 
which it is supposed will not grow here. At one time 
it was planted quite freely, with the view of making 
cider from the fruit, but I think it has never proved 
satisfactory. The fruit is used to some extent in our 
western cities as a substitute for the quince for pre- 
serves, and mixing with better fruit, to which it 
imparts its aroma; but it has never had a 'boom,' 
and hence the demand for the fruit is limited and its 
commercial value not great. It is no better than the 
wild crab as a stock upon which to work the apple. 
There is no reliable evidence that it is a hybrid, and 
I believe it to be a natural variation." The "Farmer's 
Union," of Minneapolis, published the following state- 
ment in 1873, in reply to a remark made in the "Gar- 
deners' Monthly : " " The Soulard grows at Pembina, 


more than three hundred miles north of St. Paul. 
The Soulard of all other crabs is the most valuable. 
It cannot be used as an eating apple. It is bitter, 
worse than a quince, but for preserves it is quite 
equal if not superior to the quince. We consider it 
to-day the most valuable fruit grown in the North- 
west." It is probable that too much was expected of 
the Soulard crab when it was first introduced, and 
that it afterwards suffered from the partial collapse. 
Such an array of apples has now been introduced into 
the cold Northwest — from the East, from Russia, 
offspring of the Siberian crab, and local seedlings of 
the common apple — that the Soulard crab and its kin 
have been obscured. 

What is the botanical history of this Soulard crab ! 
So far as I know, this crab has always been regarded 
as Pyrus coronaria, or as a hybrid between it and the 
common apple. Any one familiar with Pyrus coranaria 
as it grows in the eastern states will at once observe 
that the leaves and short petioles and peduncle of the 
Soulard crab belong to some other species. In my first 
critical study of the Soulard crab, I became convinced 
that it represents a distinct natural species, and accord- 
ingly named it Pyrus Soulardi ("American Garden," 
xii. 472), and this conclusion was fortified by the fact 
that the plant occurs in a wild stat« from Minnesota, 
apparently, to Texas. The technical characters which I 
found to separate this plant from both Pyrus coronaria 
and P. loensis are the following : 

"Leaves round-ovate to elliptic-ovate, either 
rounded or tapering at the base, large, bluntly and 
closely* serrate or dentate -serrate when young, irregu- 
larly crenate- dentate at maturity, with a tendency to 



become lobed, obtuse or even truncate at the top, on 
short (1 inch or less) and thick pubescent petioles, 
very thick and conspicu- 
ously rugose, and clothed 
below with a dense tomen- 
tum like the ordinary 
apple leaf, which it much 
resembles in color and 
texture (Fig. 50) ; flowers 
smaller than in P. coro- 
naria, crowded .in close 
clusters like those of the 
common apple, and borne 
on short (% to % inch 
long), densely white- 
woolly pedicels. A rather 
upright and stout-growing 
tree, occurring from Min- 
nesota (Lake Calhoun, 
Hh, H. Matin,) to Texas 
(Gillespie county, O. 
Jenny) . Judging from the 
few specimens in herbaria, 
this must be an uncommon 
species. In fact, I have 
seen but three wild speci- 
mens, as follows : Lake 
Calhoun, Minn., Hb. 
Mann. (Cornell Univer- 
sity); St. Louis, Mo., Hb. 
Torrey, and Texas, Hb. 
cultivated plant from several sources. 

"Whatever value my conclusions may ultimately be 

Fig. 50. Matnre leaf of Soulard crab. 

Dept. Agr. I have the 


found to possess," I- said at the time, "I bope that the 
atraDgement now proposed will serve to elucidate the 
confused knowledge of our wild crab apples." With 
this saving clause in mind, I now 
confess to a belief that Pyrns Soiilardi 
is not a true species, but is a hy- 
brid between Pyrtis loertsis and the 
apple, Pyrus Mahts. The 
chief considerations which lead me 
to this cone Ins ion are the 
facts that the plant, in a 
wild state, seems to have 
no connected or normal 
range, and that various 
specimens which I have 
had an opportunity to ex- 
, amine during the past few 
\ years have shown almost 
1 complete gradations from 
i one of these species to the 
\ other. I cannot now de- 
i fine Pynis Sovlardi by any 
characters which are not 
also common to one or 
both of the other species, 
Pyrus loensis or P. Mains. 
The reader can trace the 
features of these assumed 
parents in the various pic- 
tures of them and of the 
mpany this test. Fig. 46 shows 
outlines of the leaf of Pyrus loensis, and Fig. 51 of 
the common apple. Fig. 50 is a good intermediate. 

FK. U. L«ftf ol commi 

Soulard type which a 



FormB of large-fruited crabs are now frequently 
discovered in the thickets of the West. The photo- 
graphs of the Mathews crabs, shown full size in Figs. 
52 and 53, will give an idea of the 
size imil livaiity of eorae of these wild 
fniits. These specimens were sent 
UK; liy B. A. Mathews, of Kiioxville, 
cultivating it. It has 
very large, apple-like, 
smooth leaves. Mr. 
Mathews writes that 
trees of this which he 
has in cultivation gave 
fruit, in the fall of 
1890, which "sold at 
one dollar per bushel, 
while good fruit of 
Grimes' Golden, 
Roman Stem and 
others was selling for 
fifty to seventy-five cents." Mr. Mathews adds: 
"I saw specimens of another wild crab last fall 
which reminded me of small Grimes' Golden, It was 
the nicest one I have seen." J. S. Harris, Minnesota, 
writes, "I saw a sample of native crab last fall that 
was l"rger than the Sonlard, and quite distinct 
from ." 

The late D. B. V r, of Illinois, onee wrote me as 
follows respecting wild crahs: "Along the streams 
in northern Illinois I have seen many wild crabs the 
superior of the Sonlard in every characteristi<', yet none 
with qualities sueh as would give them rauoh value for 
cultivation, though many might be useful as culinary 


fruits. If the quince is a valuable culinary fruit, the 
})etter varieties of the wild American crab are worthy 
a place in the garden and orchard for the same 
purposes. The crab is much the hardier, handsomer 
tree, and subject to much fewer ills than the quince, 
and is usually enormously productive of its peculiar 
austere fruit. The wild crab ripens its fruit from 
early autumn until the following summer. The old 
practice in pioneer times was to bury the hard fruit in 
the soil late in autumn and so leave it until spring, 
when it would open out a fine golden yellow. 

"In its wild state, this crab is a variable fruit in 
size, color, flavor, shape and time of ripening. I have 
seen trees of it growing wild, with fruits averaging 
fully two inches in diameter. The fruit of the Soulard 
runs from one and a-half to two inches. The fruit 
of it is generally round, somewhat flattened, averaging 
about an inch in diameter, though often larger or 
smaller. It is rarely oblong, sometimes pyriform, and 
I have seen it (or one of the same type) in one instance 
with the fruit pyriform, and with a bright red cheek, 
growing in the woods miles away from domesticated 
apples; and I have heard of two other like instances. 
The better varieties of our wild crab should be a fruit 
of value in the far north, above the line where the 
common apple can be safely grown. And there is no 
doubt, from its natural variability, that a fruit of con- 
siderable value could be produced from it for culinary 
purposes. The pioneers had little use for it, simply 
because sugar in those days cost money, and money 
at times was not to be had." 

The Fluke crab is another of these hvbrids, from 
Iowa, with fruits as large as those of the Mathews. 


It is strange that hybrids of the commoD apple and 
Pynis coronaria have never been found, although both 
species are common in the eastern states. But the fact 
that the apple seems to hybridize freely with Pyrus 
loensis and not with P. coronaria , is still further indi- 
cation that these two native crabs are really distinct 
species, as species go. To my mind, there is much 
promise of good to come from the further amalgama- 
tion of Pyrns loensis and the common apple, particularly 
in the augmentation of hardiness of tree and keeping 
qualities of the fruit. There is warrant for this opinion 
in the old-time crabs of our gardens, of the Transcen- 
dent type, for these are hybrids of the common apple 
and the Siberian crab, Pyrus baccata. So distinct in 
appearance are some of these apples that Willdenow 
long ago called them a distinct species, Pyrus pruni- 
folia,* There are many crabs in cultivation which 
belong to this prunifolia class, and they are prized for 
culinary qualities, beauty, productiveness and hardi- 
ness. Pyrus prunifolia is to the apple and the Siberian 
crab what Pyrus Soulardi is to the common apple and 
the prairie states crab ; and if the former tj-pe is val- 
uable we have reason to hope that the latter will be 
also. Various experiments have already been made in 
hybridizing this western crab with the apple, by C. G. 
Patten, of Iowa, by experimenters at the Iowa Agri- 
cultural College, and elsewhere ; but it is probable 
that the larger part of the future improvement will 
be fortuitous, for nature makes her experiments upon 
an extensive scale, and she never gives up. The years 

♦Willdenow's type of P. prunifolia^ presenetl in Berliu, 8how8 flowers and 
leaves nnd hns the hotnnical eharneters of the Transcendent and Hyslop erabs. 
It iB almost unmistakably a hybrid of Pyrus Main* and P. haceata. 


are hers. The insinuation of the native blood into 
domestic apples will probably be very gradual and 
undemonstrative, and much of the result will prob- 
ably never be discovered ; but the benefits will be all 
the greater if the native species shall be so com- 
pletely blended with other types that their influence 
is not recognized. 



The raspberry has long been one of the important 
bush -fruits of Europe. The wild plant is native to 
Europe, and it was named Bubus Idceus by Linnaeus, 
from Mt. Ida, in Greece, where it seems to have been 
early esteemed. This raspberry has been cultivated 
from the fourth century of our era, and perhaps even 
earlier, although its cultivation had not attracted much 
attention until two or three centuries ago. About 
twenty named varieties were known in England early 
in this century. 

This excellent European fruit was early introduced 
into American gardens. M'Mahon recommends it 
in his admirable "American Gardener's Calendar," in 
1806. "There are many varieties of the Ruhus Idceus, 
or European raspberrj'," he writes, "but the most pref- 
erable are the large common red, the large common 
white, the red Antwerp, and the white Antwerp rasp- 
berries." The first edition of Prince's "Pomological 
Manual," 1831, describes a dozen varieties, the greater 
number of which are of foreign origin. It was soon 
found, however, that this European type of raspberry 
is unreliable in North America. This is chiefly because 
of lack of hardiness, both in withstanding the cold of 
winter and the drought and heat of summer. Conse- 
quently, the raspbeny failed to attract much attention 



except in garden cultivation, where some protection 
and the best care could be given it. The Antwerp 
and the Fontenay, varieties of this species, are still 
grown by amateurs. 

Early American History 

But, as in the grapes, plums, gooseberries, and 
other fruits, there are raspberries growing in the 
woods which quickly lent themselves to domestication 
as soon as an effort was made to tame them. In 
fact, they came into cultivation without an invitation, 
and so little have we cared for their genealogies that 
it is not until the last six or eight years that any 
real attempt has been made to discover the botanical 
affinities of the various types. The first native berry 
to come into cultivation was called the English Red, 
the name itself recording the ignorance of its origin. 
In 1831, when Prince wrote, this was "the only variety 
at present cultivated to a great extent for the supply 
of the New York market, and there are probably near 
one hundred acres of land on Long Island appropri- 
ated to its culture." Prince was aware of its botani- 
cal affinities, and he substitutes for the name English 
Red the truer one of Common Red, and gives it 
Bubus Americanus for its Latin name. He says that 
it "is a native of our state, and grows naturally- in 
the Catskill Mountains." "The fruit is one of the 
earliest at maturity, of medium size, fine flavour, and 
held in great estimation, as well for the dessert as 
for making cherry brandy, &c." Prince also men- 
tions the Virginia Red, which appears not to have 
been in cultivation ; the Pennsylvanian, a red -fruited 


variety which he obtained "from a London nursery, 
under the title of Bubiis Pennsylvanicus, but have 
since found it to be identical with plants received 
from the forests of the State of Maine ; " and the 
Canada Red, or Ruhus Canadensis^ a red raspberry of 
medium size which he had seen growing along the 
roadsides near Montreal, and the fruit of which was 
there collected and "large quantities sold in the mar- 
kets." Prince also mentions the wild black raspberry, 
but this was not cultivated. The preference for the 
red berries is easily explained from the fact that the 
fruits of the European raspberry are red or purple. 
The earliest raspberry -growers naturally followed the 
foreign models ; but these patterns were destined soon 
to be obscured by a new type of fruit. 

We shall find this new type of fruit — the improved 
black raspberry or black -cap — developing in the West, 
and its genius is Nicholas Longworth, the same pro- 
phetic spirit who put American grape -growing on its 
feet. He had found a wild raspberry of unusual 
promise in Ohio in 1832. After he had cultivated it 
for a number of years, he was not only convinced of 
its value for America, but wanted it tried in England 
as well. So we find him writing to the "Gardener's 
Magazine," in London, about his new berry:* 

"When driven into the interior of the state by the 
cholera, in September and October of 3832, I found a 
raspberry in full bearing, a native of our state, and 
the only everbearing raspberrj' I have ever met with. 
I introduced it the same winter into my garden, and 
it is now cultivated by me in preference to all others, 

*A synopsis of this history is iniblished in Bull. 117, Cornell Exp. Sta. 


and my table is supplied from the beginning of June 
till frost. 

^^By means of heat, under glass, it might be made 
to bear well through the winter. The first of June it 
produces a most abundant crop, about ten days earlier 
than any other variety. The wood producing that 
crop dies through the early part of the summer, and 
the second shoots begin to ripen fruit before the crop 
on the old wood is over, and continue to bear till 
frost, and then produce the June crop of the follow- 
ing season. The fruit is black, of good size, and is 
preferred by a majority of persons at my table to the 
Antwerp. The vine is a native of the northern part 
of our state, where the summers are not as dry and 
warm as at our city, and they have a substratum of 
clay. In my garden the substratum is gravel, and 
our summers are dry and hot. From these causes it 
does not bear as well with me through the heat of 
the summer as it does in its native region, and will 
do in a cooler and moister climate, I sent some to my 
sister, nine miles from New York, where the substra- 
tum is clay, and the climate cooler and less subject 
to drought. With her it produces double the fruit in 
the heat of summer that it does with me. From these 
causes I have believed it would bear most abundantly 
in most parts of Great Britain. It does not increase by 
offsets, as other raspberries do, but in September and 
October the shoots descend to the ground, and each 
one, as it strikes the earth, throws out six or seven 
small shoots, that immediately take root and throw up 
shoots. I say it is a native, because I have never 
seen or heard of it except the few plants in a par- 
ticular location where I found it in 1832. It has 


not yet been offered for sale, except a few plants by 
Mr. Howarth, who now contemplates taking his entire 
stock to England. It is unknown out of this vicinity 
and there is but one person who has more than a few 
plants, as there have been none for sale. Our sea- 
sons have been dry of late years, and, anxious to 
supply my own garden, I could spare none, except a 
plant to a particular friend. All beyond what are 
wanted in my garden, ray gardener furnished to Mr. 
Howarth. The vine is very hardy, is not killed by 
frost, is of rapid and vigorous growth, and requires 
no particular cultivation, except that, from its vigor- 
ous growth, it should have a higher trellis than the 
Antwerp. * * * * :ic :#. 

"Cincinnati, Ohio, September 30, 1841." 

Attached to this letter is a memorandum from 
J. B. Purcell, Bishop of Cincinnati, testifying to the 
goodness of both Mr. Longworth and the fruit: 
"I feel happy in expressing ray perfect assent to 
what has been stated above, on which the most 
perfect reliance can be placed," the reverend gentle- 
man says. "Mr. Longworth has no interest but the 
public good and the advancement ' of horticulture 
to promote, by his bringing before the people of 
England this luxurious, hardy, and indigenous va- 
riety of the raspberry. As far as my judgment 
goes, I have never tasted a finer species of that 
fruit." The editor of the magazine adds that "plants 
of this raspberry are in a London nursery, but none 
of them will be sold till the worth of the variety 
is ascertained." The variety never gained much 
note in England, but Robert Hogg still retains it 
in the fifth edition of his "Fruit Manual," in 1884, 


although it is probably long since extinct in America. 

Longworth's letter to the "Gardener's Magazine" 
is not the earliest record of this raspberry, however. 
The earliest note of it which I have seen is the fol- 
lowing, in Hovey's "Magazine of Horticulture," Bos- 
ton, for 1837: 

^^Everbearing Raspberry, — The * Genesee Farmer' 
states that a new kind of raspberry has been found in 
New York state, near Lake Erie, by the Shakers 
residing there, and that it produces its fruit through- 
out the summer and autumn. It is also stated to be 
really a valuable variety, and worthy of extensive cul- 
tivation. The fruit in appearance is longer than the 
wild black raspberry, and approaches near, in size and 
excellence, to the White Antwerp, but is not so high 
flavored. The habit of growth is somewhat similar 
to the common purple raspberry, the shoots of which 
are very vigorous, bending over and touching the 
ground, and take root, by which mode it is rapidly 
increased. Its mode of producing its fruit is as fol- 
lows : In the spring the old shoots throw out their 
new branches, as in other sorts upon which the first 
(^rop appears, but soon the new shoots begin to grow, 
and when they have attained a good size, which is 
generally just before the first crop is gone, they pro- 
duce the second crop ; to this latter circumstance it 
owes its name, and its peculiarity. The fruit of the 
second crop is considered the best. It is grown by 
Mr. Longworth, of Cincinnati, and by the Shakers 
near Lebanon, but has not yet found its way into any 
of our Atlantic cities." 

In 1842, the same magazine makes another account 
of this variety : 


"T/i6? JEverbearinq Raspberry. — In our Vol. III., p. 
154, under our Miscellaneous Notices, we gave an 
account [quoted above] of this fruit, which had then 
just been brought into notice ; since then, we have 
heard very little of it till the past year. It is now 
attracting more attention, and as it is deemed a valu- 
able acquisition, we have copied a further description 
of it below, which we find in the * American Agricul- 

"The Ohio everbearing raspberry was first dis- 
covered some fifteen years ago, in the northern part 
of the state, near Lake Erie, but in what particular 
part is unknown. Mr. Longworth, of Cincinnati, intro- 
duced it into his garden in 1832, at which period he 
was driven into the back country by the cholera, where 
he found it growing. It has been little known, how- 
ever, in Cincinnati, until within the last two years, 
but there is now great effort made by the gardeners 
to cultivate it for the market of that city. The fruit 
resembles the wild native raspberry, but is much 
larger, more fleshy, and of a much finer flavor, and 
is almost a very profuse bearer. In Cincinnati, the 
wood of the previous year bears one crop in June, 
after which it soon dies ; the young shoots then come 
into bearing, and continue doing so into October, till 
the frost cuts them off, when may be seen buds and 
blossoms, and the fruit in every stage from green up 
to full ripe, on the bush, stayed by the hand of nature 
in the midst of their productiveness. The fruit is 
preferred by many to the Red Antwerp, and with its 
large, erect clusters of flowers, presents a beautiful 

"Mr. Longworth, in a communication describing 


this fi-uit, in the ^Gardener's Magazine' [already 
quoted], states that the plants, in light, dry soils, are 
not very productive in the autumn crop ; but if grown 
on a stiff loam on a clayey subsoil, bear profusely till 
destroyed by frost. From all that has been said in 
relation to it, it appears a desirable fruit, and we hope 
soon to test its qualities ourselves." 

Prom these two last accounts, one is not sure 
whether the variety was found in New York or Ohio, 
notwithstanding the explicit statement [p. 279] that it 
came from New York state, for it is stated that it had 
not yet found its way into the Atlantic states, but was 
grown only by Longworth and by the Shakers at 
Lebanon, which is about thirty miles from Cincinnati ; 
and, moreover, it could not have occurred in the 
" northern part of the state " of New York and yet be 
found "near Lake Erie." Longworth 's own account 
explicitly states that he found the berry in Ohio. 

The berry became known as the Ohio Everbearing, 
and, by the natural process of elimination, as the 
Ohio. At the present time, an Ohio raspberry is 
extensively cultivated, so extensively that in western 
New York alone probably not less than a thousand 
tons of the dried berries are marketed each year from 
this single variety. But this contemporaneous variety 
is not the berry of Longworth. It originated from a 
single plant which came in a planting of another 
variety, obtained from Ohio, early in the sixties, upon 
the farm of Hiram Van Dusen, of Palmyra, New 
York. The old Ohio has passed away, but berry- 
growers have not known the fact, because the present 
variety, of like name, has been confounded with it. 
The materials which are concerned in the evolution 


of horticulture are so transient, and the records and 
histories are so few and so inaccurate, that many of 
the milestones are lost forever ; but this generation 
should do something to rescue and to hold the passing 
events upon which so much of the knowledge and 
experience of the future must rest. 

The next event in the domestication of the native 
black -cap was the introduction of a variety found 
growing wild by Leander Joslyn, of Phelps, Ontario 
county, N. Y., and introduced by H. H. Doolittle, 
of Oaks Comers, in the same county, about 1850. 
This was variously known as American Black, Joslyn's 
Black-cap, Joslyn's Improved, American Improved, 
and Doolittle. Under the last name, the variety was 
widely disseminated, and was cultivated until ten or 
fifteen years ago. Several other varieties followed 
within the next few years, but raspberry culture grew 
slowly, nevertheless. The American Pomological 
Society, at its session in 1853, commended only five 
varieties, and all of them were foreigner^. The grow- 
ing of small -fruits had not yet assumed great impor- 
tance in this country. There were no facilities for 
marketing such fruits in any quantity, people had not 
learned to use them freely, and the farmers were 
wedded to the old-time crops. It was not until after 
1870 or 1875 that, under the stimulus of a general 
awakening and new teaching in agricultural matters, 
the cultivation of the bush -fruits began to attract wide- 
spread attention. Meantime, however, the foundations 
were all laying. Forehanded persons here and there 
were learning how to grow and handle the new fruits. 
Books and periodical articles, some of them in advance 
of their time, were expounding the new ideas. Now 


and then a patient investigator was working out new 
problems and securing new varieties. The bud of a 
new type of agriculture was slowly developing. We 
now foresee the full bloom.* 

Among the earliest American experimenters with 
raspberries was Dr. William D. Brinckl6, of Philadel- 
phia, "a busy physician, who," as Professor Card 
writes, "having a taste for pomology, pursued it as a 
means of recreation from other duties. He experi- 
mented with strawberries and pears, as well as with 
raspberries. So important was his work in these 
lines that he seems to be much better remembered for 
that than for his medical reputation, although he was 
successful and prominent in this field also. He was 
president of the American Pomological Society at its 
second session, and for many years vice-president of 
the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society, repeatedly 
refusing its presidency. Unfortunately, his work on 
raspberries was with the Ruhus Idceus species, and 
most of the varieties which he produced have suffered 
the fate of the class to which they belong ; yet he 
obtained in Brinckl6's Orange the variety which has 
stood as the desideratum to be sought in quality to 
the present day." This' variety has the following his- 
tory, to quote Dr. Brinckl6 himself : " It originated 
* * * * * from a seed of Dyark's Seedling, 
a large English crimson variety, imported by Mr. 
Robert Buist, of Philadelphia. The seed was planted 
July 13th, 1843, vegetated in the spring of 1844, 
fruited in 1845, and described in the * Horticulturist' 

♦For a very full description of nil the varieties of raspberries cultivated In 
the United States, see Crozier, Bull. Ill, Mich. Exp. Sta. Consult, also, Card's 


for October, 1846." Dr. BrincklS died in 1863, He 
was born in Delaware, and he began his medical 
career in 1820 in Wilmington. In 1825, he removed 
to Philadelphia. A correspondent signing himself 
"R. B." (whom I take to be Robert Buist, the dis- 

Fli. M. -milLm D. Brlnekl*. .« «rly e^rlmanler with tbs «.p«rty. 

tingiiisbed seedsman and author, of Philadelphia) writ- 
ing to the "Gardener's Monthly" ujron the occasion of 
Brinckl^'s death, remarks that "Dr. Brincklfi stood at 
the very head of the pomological fraternity, and had 
done more for the science than any other person, 
whether American or European." Another correspon- 
dent, "J. J. S." (no doubt John Jay Smith, editor of 
Michaux's "Sylva," and once editor of the "Horticul- 
turist"), gives the following reminiscence of Brinckl4: 


"Soon after the establishment of the 'Horticulturist' 
I introduced my much lamented friend Downing to 
Dr. Brinckl6, at the time residing in Girard Row, 
Chestnut street, then the most distinguished range of 
houses in Philadelphia. His dwelling was capacious 
and fashionable, but its attraction to Downing was a 
garden about as large as the parlor, and a fourth -story 
front room looking south; in the former was con- 
tained a few raspberry bushes, on which the Doctor 
was experimenting ; and there stood the Brinckl6 
Orange, then bearing, for the first time, half a dozen 
of its golden berries ; others were about, but the 
Orange was evidently his pet, and it did not deceive 
his hopes. That fruit alone is a passport to enduring 
fame ; an acquisition in every sense to be proud of. 

"The up -stairs front room floor was covered with 
pots of strawberries, on which hybridizing experiments 
were in progress, and the Doctor told us, with evident 
satisfaction, that he could pick a bowl of fruit for a 
patient at all seasons. Much conversation ensued 
between the two lovers of improvement, and when we 
left. Downing said much what your correspondent has 
written [page 284], that Brinckle had done more for 
horticulture than any other person in America. If I 
am not mistaken, he thought more than all the rest 
of us put together. 

"Dr. Brinckl6 was eminently a genial man, and 
loved to have his friends around him. He gave, on 
one occasion, of a fruit-growers' exhibition, the most 
superb fruit party ever seen in this country. All the 
gardeners and amateurs vied with each other to flU his 
noble table with their best fruits; these, combined 
with the very recherche cookery of Philadelphia's best 


restaurateurs, and the best American and foreign 
wines, with the addition of the elit6 of onr citizens 
and the gardeners, formed a scene such as I have wit- 
nessed in no country. The occasion proved a most 
interesting one, serving not only to make people bet- 
ter acquainted with each other, but to promote the 
cause of fruit progress. 

"On one occasion a pleasant ruse was tried upon 
the palates of some of our best judges of wine. Long- 
worth's champagne was then a new and unknown pro- 
duct, and a supply had been forwarded to the Doctor. 
I was requested to change the labels from some very 
superior foreign champagne to Longworth's bottles, 
and to replace his on the European. Then came the 
trial! The supposed foreign was condemned and 
Longworth's had the preference from some of the 
most noted Cognescenti. The triumph was complete, 
and was long a standing subject of hilarity and joke. 

"Little in the way of labored panegyric need be 
said of our lamented friend. His own merits are 
established, 'and his deeds do follow him.'" 


Tlie Present Types of Cultivated Raspberries 

With the exception of the English Red, there 
appears to have been no native red raspberry in cul- 
tivation until nearly or quite 1860, when Allen's Red 
Prolific and Allen's Antwerp — varieties sent out by 
L. F. Allen, Black Rock, N. Y., and" which, accor- 
ding to A. S. Puller, were "merely accidental varieties 
of the wild red raspberry of his locality" — were intro- 
duced to the public ; and it was many years after this 
that the true red raspberries began to attract much 


attention from berry -growers. The old English Red 
appears not to have been a true red raspberry, but to 
be a representative of a distinct class, which later came 
to be called the Purple Cane. When Puller wrote his 
most excellent "Small-Pruit Culturist," in 1867, there 
were four types of raspberries in cultivation : the 
black-caps, represented by the American Improved or 
Doolittle, Dawson's Thomless, Elsie, Miami, Ohio 
Everbearing, Seneca, Summit Yellow-cap, Surprise, 
White -cap arid Woodside ; the red raspberries, com- 
prising Allen's Red Prolific, Allen's Antwerp, Kirt- 
land, Pearl, Stoever and Scarlet ; the purple-canes, 
with Gatawissa, EUisdale, Gardiner, Purple Cane and 
Philadelphia ; the foreign or Idaeus types, of which he 
mentions sixty-seven varieties, but which, as a class, 
although "larger and better flavored than those of our 
native species," present few varieties "that are hardy 
in the northern states, and their leaves burn more or 
less at the South." The black raspberries are direct 
offspring of the wild black-cap or thimbleberi-y, Ruhus 
occidentalism which is common everywhere in the north- 
eastern states. It is the first pure native species to 
give domestic offspring, and it is now the most widely 
and extensively cultivated of any American raspberry. 
The true red raspberries are direct offspring of the wild 
red or scarlet berry, Ruhus sirigosus^ which is the 
American representative of Ruhus IdcBUSy and by some 
botanists held to be only a geographical modification of 
the latter. It has a wide natural range, extending 
farther north than the black -cap. The foreign varie- 
ties are direct offshoots of Ruhus Idcpus, which grows 
wild from Norway and Siberia to Spain and Greece. 
But what is the purple -cane tribe, of which the 


English Red was the prototype! This was called Bu- 
bus Americanus by Prince in 1831, and his Buhus Penn- 
sylvanicus is likely the same type. A. S. Fuller appears 
to have been the first author to separate this class of 
garden berries. He calls them the "purple -canes," and 
characterizes them as follows: "The principal differ- 
ence between the varieties of the black -cap and purple- 
cane is in the fruit. The first, as is well known, has a 
rather dry, tough fruit, with a peculiar fiavor. Its 
grains are numerous and very irregular in size. The 
fruit of purple -cane, as a rule, is rather soft, juicy, 
often very brittle, the grains separating very readily ; 
color varying from light red to dark brownish purple, 
but never black ; the flavor mild and agreeable, but 
entirely distinct from those of the true black rasp- 
berry." I think that some of the sorts which have 
been referred to Bubus Idceus belong to this type, and 
also the Doolittle's Red-flavored Black, which Mr. 
Puller refers to the true black -caps. I am convinced 
that it is the most important type of raspberry known 
for America. Prom pure red raspberries, or Bubus 
strigosus, we appear to have obtained fewer varieties 
than is commonly supposed ; Cuthbert appears to me 
to be the first decided advance in that species. 

In 1869, Professor C. H. Peck studied certain wild 
raspberries in New York, and used the name Bubus 
neglectus for what he took to be a distinct natural 
species. The following year, C. P. Austin, writing of 
northern Jersey plants, in the "Bulletin of the Torrey 
Botanical Club," speaks as follows of this raspberry : 
"U. neglectus. Peck, a hybrid, I have no doubt, between 
B. strigosus and B. occidpntalis, occurs in Orange 
county, but seldom more than one bush in a place ; it 


will hardly average a bush to a hundred acres of 
land." Finally, in 1890, the present writer referred 
the purple -canes to this Buhus neglectus of Peck, and 
attempted to designate the botanical characters which 
distinguish the cultivated forms from those of Buhus 
oceidentalis and B, sirigosus. The garden berries which 
he then referred to this species are Shaffer, Caroline, 
Gladstone, Philadelphia, Reliance "and probably 
Crystal White." This Buhus neglectus is widely dis- 
tributed in a wild state. In order to understand it, we 
must draw the characters of its relatives, the black and 
the red ; and in these features the accompanying 
pictures of these species will help us. 

The botanist may distinguish our four types of 
cultivated raspberries by the following marks : 

Buhus occidentalism Linnaeus (Blackcap, Thimble- 
berry of some). (Fig. 55.) Stems long, and at ma- 
turity recurved and rooting at the tips, conspicuously 
glaucous, armed with stiff, hooked prickles ; inflores- 
cence densely cymose, the peduncles all aggregated or 
rarely one or two somewhat remote, short and stiff, 
simple and erect, bearing stiff prickles and sometimes 
also straight bristles ; petals shorter than the sepals ; 
fruit depressed, firm and dense, black. Here belong 
the Gregg, Ohio, Hilbom, Ada, and others. The close- 
fruited clusters are well shown in the accompanying 
photograph (Fig 55), and it will be seen that the 
condensation is greater in the Gregg than in the wild 
berry. Amber -fruited forms of the black -cap are 
occasionally found in wild areas. 

From Wyoming westward the wild black -cap rasp- 
berry is represented by another species, known as Buhus 
leucodermis. It is doubtful if the plant is really distinct 



from the eastern species, and Card thinks it a variety. 
Its chief marks are shoi*ter and more hooked prickles, 
more coarsely toothed leaves, and a yellowish red fruit 
which has a white bloom. It has been recommended 
for cultivation for its fruit, but no named varieties have 
yet appeared. Wickson speaks of it as having "a 
yellowish red fruit, rather large, with a white bloom, 
and agreeable flavor." Shinn says that it "occasionally 
carries a fair crop of fruit, but one may often search 
a whole acre of thimbleberry bushes in the season with- 
out obtaining a double handful." 

Ruhus neglectuSy Peck. (22nd Rep. Regents N. Y. 
State Univ. 53, 1869.) Habit various, but the stems in 
typical forms long and rooting from the tip ; stems 
glaucous, usually more or less armed with prickles, 
often bristly also ; inflorescence racemose -cymose, the 
peduncles short and usually prickly, mostly stiff, the 
upper ones erect or ascending, simple or nearly so 
above but unequally branched below, some of them 
aggregated above ; fruit varying from purple -black to 
bright purple or even yellowish. Among cultivated 
sorts, the Shaffer (Fig. 56) may be considered the type 
of the species. A glance at the illustration will show 
the aggregated character of the fruit cluster at its 
apex and the gradual tailing out of the cluster at 
the base. The lowest branches in the cluster are apt 
to give imperfect fruit. There are all gradations, 
from the heavy-topped cluster of the Cuthbert to the 
loose cluster of the Caroline, but the ragged cluster 
is usually characteristic of Ruhus neglectus, 

Rubus strigosuSy Michaux (Red Raspberry). (Fig. 
57.) Stems, at least in the wild plant, densely clothed 
with straight and weak bristles, usually brown or 


reddish brown ; inflorescence racemose, the peduncles 
scattered, all slender and drooping, either simple or 
2- or 3-flowered, not aggregated at the top, smooth 
or bristly ; petals as long as the glandular sepals ; 
fruit light red, soft. The racemose character of the 

inflorescence of this species is well shown in the pic- 
ture of Cuthbert, a variety which appears to closely 
represent in all particulars the true Riihus strigosvs. 
Hansel! also appears to be S. sIrigogHs. The wild 
plant is densely clothed with weak bristles, but these 



mostly disappear in cultivation. They sometimes per- 
sist near tlie base of the cane, and traces of them can 
be seen in the infloreseenee, I have a white-fmited 
raspberrj', which is Rubiis sMgosus. The stems are 
whitish. The leaves also possess a curious dentation. 

the teeth being rounded and tipped with a short cusp, 
but I am not sure that this is a constant character, or 
that the variety possesses any other distinguishing 
marie than albinism. 

Riibiis Tfl<eus, Linnipus (European Raspberry). 
Plant usually stiff and erect, usually stronger than 


E. strigosus, the stems bearing nearly straight slender 
prickles or weak bristles, and usually light -colored ; 
inflorescence sub -corymbose — the pedicels short, and 
aggregated above, where they are erect or ascending ; 
fruit large and broad, appearing more or less contin- 
uously throughout the summer, purple or yellowish, 
firmer than that of R, strigosus ; cal^Ts: glandless. The 
raspberries belonging to this species are usually ten- 
der in the North, as we have seen, and they have not 
been grown to any extent since the introduction to 
cultivation of the native species. Here belong the 
Fontenay, Antwerps, Fastolf, Brinckl6's Orange, and 
their kin.* 

These descriptions and figures show that the purple- 
cane or Ruhus negledus class is intermediate between 
the black -cap and true red raspberries. The type has 
no characters which are not found in one or both of 
the other two. Neither has it any normal or contin- 
uous range, but occurs where the black and red spe- 
cies are associated. All this points strongly to hybrid- 
ity; and there is now sufficient accumulation of exper- 
imental evidence to prove a hybrid origin for these 

* Card, who has given inneh thought to the mspberrieB, sives me the follow- 
ing contrasts of the two red-fruited species: 

Rubus Idceus.—Pl&nt nsnally stiff, erect, and light-colored, the main stems 
bearing nearly straight slender prickles ; flowering shoots, petioles, veins, pedi- 
cels and calyx finely pubescent, but not glandular, and sparsely beset with firm 
recurved prickles; leaves thicker than in R. strigotua, whitened downy beneath 
and usually somewhat wrinkled; calyx tomentose; fruit dark red or yellow, 
produced more or less continuously throughout the season. 

R. strigo»u9.—^iffm% more slender than R, Idmts, beset with stiff, straight 
prickles, usually brown or reddish brown, somewhat glaucous; flowering shoots, 
pedicels, calyx and petioles hirsute with glandular-tipped hairs in the wild 
type, though largely disappearing in cultivation; calyx slightly pubescent or 
hirsute: fruit light red, rarely yellow, produced less continuously than in 
R' Idxeut, 


The salient points in our raspberry history, then, 
are these : The Old World berry was early introduced 
and widely tested, but it proved to be tender, and is 
now known in this country only in the gardens of 
amateurs. The varieties which we now grow are all 
derived from our native species. The first of these 
native berries to be domesticated appears to have been 
a natural hybrid between the wild black and the wild 
red, and to have come into cultivation about 1825. 
This hybrid class, which seems to be the most promis 
ing type of American berries, was not recognized as dis- 
tinct until Fuller defined his purple -cane group in 
1867; in 1869, Peck founded a new species of rubus on 
it, calling it Buhus neglectus; in 1890 the purple-cane 
raspberries and Rubus neglectus were determiued to be 
of similar type and origin. The first direct effort at 
improving the native berry was the introduction of a 
promising wild Ohio berry in 1832 by Nicholas Long- 
worth, and this berry subsequently came to be known 
as Ohio Everbearing. The chief merit of this first 
cultivated black -cap, in the eyes of its disseminators, 
was its habit of bearing a second crop of fruit in the 
fall, a feature which is by no means uncommon in the 
black raspberries. This Ohio is probably no longer 
cultivated, but there is another Ohio raspberry, of later 
origin, which is widely grown. The general influence 
of amelioration in enlarging the fruit and condensing 
the cluster is shown in Fig. 55. The Gregg is a fair 
example of the improved black-cap, although a recent 
variety has brought the size of individual berries to an 
inch in length and three inches in circumference at 
the base. The domestication of the true wild red 
raspberry began shortly before 1860. But the red 



type which is most productive of good and various 
forms is the purple-cane group, which we have already 

There is every reason to believe that much greater 

Flc. S8. A smtden b^brid. Qrtgt 

results are possible in the improvement of the Ameri- 
can raspberries than have yet been obtained. The 
European raspberry is still superior in size and quality, 
but if it has been possible to derive the varied garden 


berries of the Old World from a single species, still 
greater results may be expected from the ameliora- 
tion of two species which freely hybridize. 

Outlying Types 

The Salmon -berry of the Pacific coast has come 
into cultivation within the last very few years as a 
fruit plant. The best type is Bnbus Nutlianus var. 
velutinus, Charles Howard Shinn, of the California 
Experiment Station, writing in "Garden and Forest" 
in 1894, says that this plant "belongs more distinctly 
to the northern California coast, where it is highly 
esteemed, but it does not grow well elsewhere." 
Wickson, in "California Fruits," says that the variety 
"thrives best in the upper coast counties, and 
efforts to introduce it as a commercial fruit generally 
throughout the state have not proved successful." 
Buhus Niitkamis itself ranges from northern Michigan 
to Alaska and New Mexico, always being a boreal, 
subalpine or highland plant. It is closely allied to 
the common flowering- raspberry, or Buhus odoratus, of 
the East, from which it differs chiefly in having 
white flowers, a less dense clothing of glandular 
hairs, less acuminate lobes to the large leaves, and a 
larger fruit. It bears a large and sweet hemispherical 
red fruit. This species itself, as well as the variety 
velutinus, is recommended for cultivation. Both are 
known as Salmon -berries. 




North Asierica is the only country which can boast 
of the cultivation of blackberries and dewberries for 
their fruits. The hedges of Europe are full of black- 
berries, and many of the bushes produce excellent 
fruit, but they are too common and the bushes too 
vicious and wayward to attract the cultivator. Now 
and then bushes are transplanted to the gardens, but 
there appear to be no named varieties. "Nowhere in 
the three kingdoms,'' writes Qrindon in his "Fruits 
and Fruit -Trees," "is it more plentiful or of finer 
quality than in the southern parts of Ireland. Yet 
there, this natural gift of the soil, untaxed, uncharged 
for, Svithout money and without price,' while it might 
be made a source of immense and permanent wealth to 
the poorer inhabitants, is left wholly untouched ; and 
this when we are sending millions of money every 
year to foreign countries for fruits that have not half 
the intrinsic worth of the ill -requited Btibus fruti- 
cosiis" Hogg, in his great English "Fruit Manual," 
does not mention the blackberry. 

"Perhaps it would be casting discredit on the 
worthy ancestors who braved so many dangers in the 
settlement of our country to charge them with undue 
conservatism," writes Professor Card, in a sketch of 
the blackberry, in "American Gardening," "yet it can 



hardly be doubted that men who would brave the 
uncertainties, not to say terrors, of an ocean voyage 
on an almost unknown sea, and the settlement of a 
new country peopled with savages of unknown traits 
and tendencies, rather than surrender ideas which they 
cherished, would not be quick to form new ones. 
Hence we can readily conclude that the blackberry 
of America was to them much what the blackberry of 
England had been — simply a wild bramble, to be 
destroyed when possible and replaced by something 
better, and whose fruit was to be gathered at will. 
Moreover, to cultivate a fruit which was so readily 
obtained in abundance for the gathering would have 
been folly to them, when many other things conducive 
to their safety and comfort were so much more needed. 
As time went on, however, this gratuitous feast of 
nature, provided for the fostering of infant indus- 
tries,' began to diminish, and the demand of growing 
cities for increased quantities of fruit doubtless led to 
the idea of cultivating the blackberry among the rest. 
Just when this state of affairs was reached it is impos- 
sible to say, but evidently not until quite late in our 
national development, for the blackberry does not 
seem to have begun to receive much notice or to be 
talked about in the horticultural journals until about 
1850. From 'Hovey's Magazine of Horticulture,' it 
appears that Capt. Josiah Lovett, of Beverly, Mass., 
figured prominently in introducing it to cultivation. 
Even then, as with many other good and useful things, 
first impressions were unfavorable. Of course, the 
first effort would naturally be to bring plants which 
bore the most promising fruit from the woods and 
clearings, and set them in the garden. This attempt 


to tame the wild proteg6 of the forest did not often 
prove satisfactory. These plants evidently did not 
take kindly to the refinements of civilization, and 
longed for their free and easy life of the wood. Cap- 
tain Lovett reports repeated failures in trying to get 
good berries by this method. He persevered for five 
years, and at last gave up in despair, about 1840, and 
surrendered this wild gypsy of the fruits to its native 
haunts as untamable. In spite of these discouraging 
results he evidently did not give up the dream of a 
cultivated blackberry, for Downing gives him the 
credit of having introduced the Dorchest'Cr, which in 
time proved so valuable, although according to Mar- 
shall P. Wilder, as reported in the * Transactions of 
the Massachusetts Horticultural Society' for 1883, 
p. 129, it was brought to notice by Eliphalet Thayer, 
who first exhibited it before that society, August 7, 

"But the first introductions to cultivation, the 
Dorchester and New Rochelle, were not calculated to 
bring swift and lasting popularity to the blackberi-y 
as a garden fruit, for although large and attractive, 
their habit of turning black before they are ripe nearly 
always led to their being gathered and eaten while 
green, and their consequent condemnation as sour and 
poor in quality. Moreover, their culture, being little 
understood, led to frequent failures and unsatisfactory 
results, while their propensity to persist and spread, 
aided by their unmerciful thorns, conspired to render 
them a terror to many timid gardeners. In spite of 
all this, the blackberry has steadily pushed its way 
into prominence, until it is to-day one of our most 
satisfactory and profitable crops. Here, as with all 


other fruits, we are far from attaining perfection. 
We have no ideal variety. Jf we demand the best in 
point of hardiness, we must yield in size and quality; 
if delicacy of flavor is the desideratum, something else 
will be deficient. Yet to stand by a well -grown row 
of Early Cluster, for example, to see its glistening 
sprays of glossy black hanging in such graceful pro- 
fusion, to gather its magnificent berries and to test 
their sweet and melting quality, just like those finest 
and ripest ones you used now and then to chance 
upon in some wooded nook which everybody else had 
missed, is to forget for the time being that there is 
anything further to be desired in a blackberry. Still, 
we have reason to hope that the achievements of this 
energetic and vigorous pomological youth are but an 
omen of what is yet to come." 

The blackberry is not mentioned by William Prince 
in his "Treatise on Horticulture," published in 1828, 
nor in his son's "Pomological Manual," either in the 
first edition, 1831, or in the second, 1832. Kenrick, 
in "New American Orchardist," 1833, mentions the 
blackberry as being worthy of cultivation, and remarks 
that plants were then occasionally transplanted to gar- 
dens. Speaking of the wild "bush blackberry," he 
says: "This plant thrives in a rich, moist, sandy 
loam, and is often cultivated in gardens, where its 
fruit is much improved in size, and its crops very 
abundant." "It is singular," he says, "that a fruit so 
productive as the tall blackberry should be so little 
cultivated." He also speaks of the "trailing black- 
berry," and the "white -fruited bramble." William 
Parry, of New Jersey, says that about 1835 he 
"planted a patch of blackberries for market, and 


continued to increase the quantity until we got more 
than fifty acres." He mentions no varieties, however, 
and it is probable that his plantations had not reached 
great size before 1860. It is likely that he began 
with the wild berry. The New Rochelle (or Lawton) 
and the Dorchester appear to have been the first 
named sorts introduced to cultivation. The Dor- 
chester was first brought to notice in 1841, befoi-e 
the Massachusetts Horticultural Society. 

" The first thing we find to notice in the exhibitions 
of 1841," runs the account in the history of the Society, 
"is the high -bush blackberry cultivated by Eliphalet 
Thayer in his garden, where it attracted much attention 
from its large and beautiful appearance." It was about 
1850 that the variety was 'introduced into cultivation 
under a name. In 1857 "the Lawton blackberry was 
exhibited and carefully tested in comparison with the 
Dorchester (as the improved high -bush was now 
called), the opinion being unanimously in favor of the 
latter." This berry, which surpassed all others in 
popularity until 1870, was found in the town of 
New Rochelle, New York, by Lewis A. Seacor. The 
Ilolcomb, brought to public notice in 1855 by E. 
A. Holcomb, Grauby, Connecticut, was also one of the 
famous old berries. Wilson's Early, of which I shall 
speak later, was known as early as 1854. It may be 
said that the blackberry began to attract attention as 
a cultivated fruit between 1850 and 1860. Fuller 
enumerates eighteen varieties of fruit -bearing black- 
berries in his "Small Fruit Culturist," in 1867. 

The blackberry is now extensively grown in the 
northern states, some farmers cultivating as high as 
forty and fifty acres, and the fruit is much esteemed, 


althongh the cultivation of it did not begin to attract 
much attention until about twenty years ago. In the 
southern states it is rarely cultivated, because it gi*ows 
in such profusion on the abundant wild lands. 
There is no bush -fruit which is capable of yielding 
greater profit. It is the last of the small fruits to 
ripen, and when it is well grown it affords a luscious 
addition to the dessert of midsummer. Some of my 
readers will at once take issue with me respecting the 
lusciousness of the blackberry, and we may as well 
argue the subject to a finish while we are in the 
mood. In justification of my position, I shall say 
that those persons who do not like the garden black- 
berry have probably never eaten a ripe one. Those red 
and juiceless objects which one finds frying in the 
sun and patronized by flies in front of grocery stores 
are not the fruits about which I am writing. They 
might have been green berries or red berries, but they 
were never ripe blackberries. There is no berry fruit 
grown which sooner deteriorates after picking, and few 
which are necessarily picked in such unfit condition. 
The blackberry is not ripe simply because it is black; 
it must be soft, and it must drop into the hand when 
the cluster is shaken. In this condition it is full of 
the sweetness and aroma of midsummer. It is our 
most delicious bush -fruit. Of course, such berries as 
these never find their way to the market, and hence it 
comes that my reader who has never grown the fruit 
is still wincing in memory of the unbearable acid of 
the blackberry. Then, there are those who declare that 
the tame berry is intolerably sourer than the wild one. 
It is true that it is more juicy when well grown, and 
this juice is very sour until the berry is soft to the core. 


But the flavor of the wild berry is usually quite as much 
a compound of pleasant memories of youthful associa- 
tions and stimulating adventures as it is of sweet- 
ness and flavor ; and then, when one picks wild berries 
he always selects the ripest and the best, and these 
become the standard with which he compares the un- 
timely fruits which he buys of the groceryman. I also 
held tenaciously to the opinion that the tame berrj*^ is 
inferior to the wild one until, a few years ago, I visited 
the wild patch in which grew those incomparable ber- 
ries of my boyhood. But I found the berries scant and 
seedy, many of them inexcusably sour, and the briers 
intolerable. I came back to my Agawams with relish, 
and they are to this day my ideal of summer fruits. 

What a silent evolution the blackberry has under- 
gone ! It is not yet fifty years since the first named 
blackberry, the Dorchester, was introduced to general 
notice, and ,in 1875 that the New Rochelle, or Lawton 
was exhibited before the Massachusetts Horticultural 
Society; and thereupon blackberry culture began to at- 
tract wide attention in the country. The Lawton held 
undisputed sway until it was superseded by the Kitta- 
tinny some ten or fifteen years later. The Kittatinny, 
in turn, gave way to the Snyder in about ten or fifteen 
years, and this latter variety is now the leading com- 
mercial blackberry. In the meantime, however, a host 
of varieties had appeared, very many of them wildings 
or chance bushes found in fence -rows, but so quietly 
have they come in that no one has been sufficiently 
attracted by them to enquire minutely into their 
genesis or to attempt to classify them into botanical 
groups. In spite of all the attention given to it, the 
blackberry is still a neglected and unknown fruit ! 


The botanical features of the blackberry are obscure 
and variable. This is true of the genus Rubus as a 
whole, but particularly of the groups which comprise 
the blackberries and dewberries. It is probable that 
no two monographers will ever agree upon the limits of 
the species and natural varieties in these groups. 
Some classification of these forms must be made, how- 
ever, before we can understand the evolution of the 
garden types, and I therefore ask the reader's forbear- 
ance if I seem to refine this discussion beyond the 
needs of a popular narrative. 

The High -bush Blackberry and its Kin 

The commonest blackberry of North America is an 
upright and very thorny and villous bush, which pro- 
duces a long raceme of flowers and fruit. The type 
of this species may be assumed to be that shown in 
Figs. 59 and 60. 

It is often known as the "high-bush blackberrj." 
The particular marks of this plant are the tall stature; 
the long stalks to the leaves and the leaflets; the long- 
ovate, rather thin and shallow -toothed pointed leaflets; 
the very long, open and leafless simple raceme, with the 
slender branchlets or pedicels standing off from the cen- 
tral stem at a very obtuse angle. The lowest flowers in 
the raceme open first. The calyx -lobes are long and 
narrow. The fruits are oblong and thimble-like, firm, 
aromatic and sweet when ripe. In cultivation, this 
type of blackberry is represented by the Taylor and 
Ancient Briton. For horticultural purposes the group 
may be called the "Long-cluster Blackberries."* 

*This classiflcAtion was first proposed in Ball. 00, Cornell Exp. Sta. (1805). 



A cloeely related form, common in open and dryish 
places, is a bash generally only two or three feet 
high, bearing a short 
cluster of small 
roundish mostly loose- 
gi-ained fiiiits. The 
\'ni-ietie8 of this typo 
have a strong ten- 
dency to produce a 
few later fruits on 
the tips of the new 
growth. These late 
fruits often ripen ns 
late as the first w« 
ill Septembei'. The 
leafiets are broader, 
more abruptly 
pointed, usually 
thicker and shorter- 
)i;talked, and generally j 
very coarsely and un- 
evenly serrate or even 
jagged. This is the 
commonest form of 
blaekbeiTy in gar- 
dens, and includes 
such varieties as New 
Rochelle or Lawton, 
Kittatinny, Snyder, 
Agnwam, Erie, and 
Minnewaski. Typical 
clufitei-s of thin gi'oup are shown in Figs. 61, 62. It 
is comparatively few-fruited, leafy, the stems oblique 


rather than spreading, the topmost fmits more or 
less aggregated. The fruits are rounder than in the 
Long-eluster group, the drupelets larger and mostly 
softer and lesa uniform in arrangement. This tj-pe I 
have designated the "Short-cluster Blackberries." 

This group is the most prolific in cultivated varieties. 
One of the recent garden forms is shown in Fig. 63. 
A third tjpe of blackberry comprises dwarf, strict, 
leafy bushes, generally growing on dryish soils from 
New Brunswick to Kansas and the Gulf, bearing the 
flowers in short leafy clusters (Fig. 64), t 


small and firm, more oi less wrinkled light colored, 
persistiug long in the fall smooth or nearlj bo when 
fall grown, narrow, coarsely toothed Fniit early. 

roundish, medium to small, the grams large and 
rather loose. This is a very leafy plant, and is prob- 
ably a distinct species from the common blackberry. 
In cultivation, it is known in the Early Harvest 


(Figs. 64, 65), Brunton's Early, and possibly Baugor. 

The Dorchester, as I have seen it growing in lat« 

years, also belongs here, bnt I do not know if the 

plants which I have swn are 

lineul ilescendEints »f 

Dorchester introdix 

Capta u Lovetfc 1 

form (B b g rgut 

most w (lelj dis 

tributed of any of 

our blackberr es 

In Texas t is rep 

resented b the 

Dallas vh h 

the lest med um 

earl bla kberr 

for tl at reg on 

Varieties of this 

type I have called 

the "Leafy -cluster 


A dwarf er or 
more condensed 
form of the high- 
bush blackberry is 
abundant in the 
Adirondacks and 
Alleghenies, where it is 
often known as the nioun 
tain blackberry. It boa 5;^^ 
been distinguished bj Pro -"^i^ 
fessor Porter, who first 
described it as Rubus ril- 


losHS var. montanus, but who now ("Bulletin Torrey 
Club," xxiii. p. 153) regards it as a distinct species, 
and calls it Eubiis Allegheniensis . "Its slender stalks 
are less prickly than those of the common blackberry," 
he writes, "and usually reddish, but the chief differ- 
ence lies in the fruit, which is much smaller, of 
oblong shape, often narrowed toward the apex (thim- 
ble-like), scarcely fleshy, and possessed of a peculiar 
spicy flavor." The flower clusters are shorter than 
those of the typical high-bush blackberry, but they 
are of the same kind, and the leaves also retain the 
distinguishing features of that species. It is probablj- 
only a mountain or highland form of the common 

A curious variation of the common blackberrj' is 
the so-called white blackberry. It has the stems 
throughout greenish yellowy leaflets much as in the 
common blackberry in shape and dentation; clusters 
long and bearing simple bracts, hairy and glandular; 
fruit small, creamy white or amber -colored. I have 
known this plant from childhood. It grew sparingly 
in the woods in western Michigan, and it was 
occasionally transferred to gardens. In one garden, 
at least, it has grown for more than twenty years, 
and it has always retained its characteristics. There 
is also a patch of it along an old roadside in cen- 
tral New York, where, except in the light color of 
the foliage, stems and fruits, it does not appear to 
differ from the normal high -bush blackberries in the 
neighborhood. It is generally distributed from New 
York to Michigan, but appears to be very local. The 
white blackberries sometimes advertised by nursery- 
men no doubt belong here. 


Certain cultivated varieties, which I have called the 
" Loose -cluster Blackberries," differ from all the pre- 
ceding types. Tlie class is characterized by a low and 
often diffuse growth, broad, jaggred and notched leaves, 
mostly loose -grained, roundish or roundish -oblong 


fruits, which are sometimes very large, and particu- 
larly by the few flowers scattered on long stems to- 
wards the end of the canes. Sometimes the canes 
have a distinct tendency to root at the tip. The vari- 
ous pictures (Figs. 66-69) show the features of this 
curious tribe of berries. 

The progenitor of these loose -cluster berries was 
the Wilson Early, which was discovered in the wild 
about 1851, by John Wilson, Burlington, New Jersey. 
This attracted much attention in New Jersey, but it 
was too tender for New York and New England. One 
of the men to bring this variety into great promi- 
nence was William Parry, a nurseryman and fruit- 
grower of Parry, New Jersey. Fuller says, in 1867: 
"It is but little known, except in the vicinity where 
it originated. Mr. Win. Parry, John S. Collins, Jas. 
S. Williams, and a few other fruit-growers near Phil- 
adelphia have quite extensive plantations of this va- 
riety, and from an examination of the fruit the past 
season, I conclude that it will prove to be one of the 
most valuable varieties yet introduced." Parrj^ was 
one of the few horticulturists who has made any 
definite attempt to originate or breed new varieties of 
blackberries. I give his own history of these efforts, 
as told in "Fifty Years Among Small Fruits:'' 

"In 1860 we planted seeds of the New Rochelle, at 
that time the largest and most attractive blackberry 
known, but no attention was paid to crossing the 
blossoms with another variety, and there was no im- 
provement in the young seedlings, which bore well of 
large, handsome fruit, very acid and late in ripening. 
We never disposed of a plant of them, but destroyed 
them all, as they were not of much value compared with 

Fit- ea. WUa bUckbeny-deirlMCir bybrid. from v antral Keir York. 


the celebrated Wilson's Early, which was larger, more 
productive, and more than a week earlier, and worth 
two or three times as much per acre as any other 
blackberry then known; and in 1865 we planted 
20,000 Wilson's Early for market; they did well, 
yielded abundantly, and sold readily at wholesale, by 
the wagon load, at 50 cents per quart, and were sold 
at retail from the fruit stands at $1.00 per quart. 
The plants sold at $1,500.00 per 1,000 at wholesale, 
and retailed at from $2.00 to $3.00 each, and some 
more. One of our neighbors, who planted seventy-five 
acres of Wilson's Early blackberries, reported his 
sales of fruit for several years about 1869 to 1872 at 
$20,000 to $22,000 per annum. The Wilson Early was 
the most valuable blackberry ever grown here ; yielded 
more bushels of fruit and brought more dollars than 
any other blackberry ever sent to Philadelphia or 
New York since we have been in the business. In 
1870 we selected a healthy young Dorchester and 
planted in same hill with a strong, healthy Wilson 
Early for breeders, located far away from any other 
blackberries. They have done well together, been a 
mutual help to each other, and we have raised many- 
valuable seedlings from them. They were both early; 
the Wilson produced the largest berries, the Dorchester 
had the best canes— strong, upright growers, healthy 
and vigorous, free from rust, fungus and other mala- 
dies so very destructive among some blackberries. 
We have never obser\^ed any defect in fruit or cane 
of either of those two plants that have grown together 
now for fifteen years, and we believe they are good 
stock to breed from yet. 

"In 1875 we selected some of the largest, best and 


most perfectly developed berries from the Wilson 
Early plant, which grew in same hill with the Dor- 
chester, planted the seed first in greenhouse, and when 
large enough to transplant in open field were set in 
single hills four feet apart in nursery row, and allowed 
to remain there with good culture and pruning for 
four years, until the true character of each was de- 
veloped, and one proved to be superior to all the 
others, producing an abundance of fruit, larger and 
earlier than its parent, the Wilson Early. That one 
best plant was called Wilson Junior, and preserved 
for propagation. All the rest of that family of plants 
were destroyed. The Wilson Junior has been carefully 
propagated, and as fast as the young canes became old 
enough to bear fruit, have been very satisfactory, and 
last year (1884) one acre yielded 110% bushels of fruit 
by side of five acres of Wilson Early in same field, 
with similar culture, which averaged but 53 bushels, 
and the whole crop of blackberries in the county of 
Burlington, N. J., is reported at 47 bushels per acre. 
The fruit was large, early and very fine, and sold better 
in market than any other sent from the Pomona Nur- 
series, selected berries measuring 4% inches around 
lengthwise by 3% inches crosswise. Many visitors 
called to see them, and all, so far as we know, thought 
well of them. * * * * 

"In 1877 we again repeated the same experiment, 
by selecting the largest and most perfect berries from 
the Wilson Early, grown by side of the Dorchester, 
planted them separately, grew them four years, then 
selected the best which is called Eureka, and all the 
rest of that family were destroyed. Of the Eureka 
we have propagated several thousand plants. They 

parry's experience 819 

are good market berries, large and early, measure 
4 inches around lengthwise, and 3% crosswise ; not 
quite so large as Wilson Junior ; therefore we have 
not disposed of or parted with any plants of Eureka, 
as we do not approve of adding to the list of varie- 
ties without gaining any new and valuable qualities. 

"In 1879 we extended the experiment by select- 
ing the best berries from both plants, set the 
seedlings in rows separately, and when they devel- 
oped their fruits, we selected two from the Wilson 
Early seedling, called Rioter and Farmer's Glory ; 
also two from the Dorchester seedling, called Gold 
Dust and Primordian. All the other seedlings were 
destroyed. Those four new seedlings were satisfac- 
tory last year (1884), bore abundantly of large 
early fruit. The Gold Dust was remarkable for the 
shoii; time in which the whole crop was ripening. 
The first picking was on 4th of July and the last 
on 8th of July, yielding a full crop of fruit in that 
short time. In 1880 we increased the number of 
our experimental hills for breeders, by setting one 
plant of Eureka and one of Wallace in same hill; 
also one plant of Taylor's Prolific and one of Eureka 
in another hill, and in 1883 gathered the best berries 
from all four varieties, planted the seeds, and now 
[1885] have the plants growing in nursery rows set 
six feet apart and all marked with the name of both 
parents, and date, for future reference." Of these 
types of varieties, only the two Wilsons ever gained 
much prominence. 

The Wilson Early and Wilson Junior blackberries 
are still the leading varieties of the loose -clustered 
type, but the latter is so nearly like the former, that 

Flc-ea. RRthbnn 1>Uekb«nr. (X two-tUida.) 


the two are not generally distinguished. These varie- 
ties are early and productive, and where the winters 
are not too severe, or when the bushes are laid down 
in winter, they are satisfactory and profitable. Some 
six or seven years ago a curious plant was noticed in 
a patch of Wilson Early belonging to John Ster- 
ling, Benton Harbor, Mich., where this variety is 
now extensively grown. This plant was almost com- 
pletely thornless, and the leaves were broad and 
rounded. It was, no doubt, simply a seedling of the 
Wilson Early. It is now called the Sterling Thornless 
blackberry'. The latest addition to this group of 
blackberries is the Rathbun (Figs. 68, 69), which 
originated with Alvin F. Rathbun, Smith's Mills, 
Chautauqua county, N. Y., and which was intro- 
duced to the trade by James Vick's Sons, in 1894. 
This has a habit of rooting very freely from the tips, 
and the fruit -cluster is very loose, with usually long 
fruit -stems. It is the widest departure from the high- 
bush type of any cultivated blackberry which I have 

What is the origin of these loose -cluster black- 
berries? Horticulturists have said that they are 
hybrids between the common blackberry and the dew- 
berry, but botanists have not investigated them, and 
they have not admitted hybrids between these very 
unlike species. But the horticulturists are right. In 
1867, Fuller thought that "it is probably a sport of 
the trailing blackberry [dewberry], or a cross between 
it and the high -bush." These hybrids of the black- 
berry and the dewberry are common enough in central 
New York, although a positive statement that such 
natural hybrids do exist appears not to have been made 



until 1895 (in Bulletin 99 of the Cornell Eiperiment 
Station). One is soon able to reco^ize them by 
their low, or diffuse, or even half-trailing habit, the 
broad, jagged and short-stalked leaflets, the loose. 

Fig. 69. SbowlDt how 

indefinite or scattered inflorescence, and the short, 
irregular fruits. One occasionally finds thera rooting 
at the tips, like a dewberry (Fig. 69), and sending 
up strong blackberry-like shoots. It is singular that 
promising natural hybrid tribes should occur in 
various g(;nera, as the native plums, appl?s, rasp- 
berries and blackberries, (See page 38X.) 

The thornless blackberry has lately come into 
prominence among botanists. (See Pigs. 92, 93.) It 
was thus described by the writer some years ago:* 

"A peculiar bush blackberry, with long waud-like 
(lanes, and entirely destitute of thorns, was poUected 
ft year or more ago by Dr. C. F. Millspaugh in West 

■Aarie. Sd.vl. M (IBIKI. 

millspaugh's blackberry 323 

Virginia, at an altitude of 3,500 feet. It appears to 
be specifically distinct from the common bush black- 
beny, and it has recently been described as a new 
species by Dr. Britton under the name of Ruhus 
Millspaughii (Bull. Torr. Bot. Club, xviii. 366, Dec. 
1891). Dr. Britton knew no other specimens than 
those of Millspaugh, except a single leaf of it in Lin- 
naeus' herbarium, in London, collected by Ealm over 
a century ago.* I am inclined to think, however, that 
the species is generally distributed over the northeastern 
states. I have recently had good specimens of it from 
the highest mountains of the Smoky range. North 
Carolina, above 6,000 feet, collected by Chas. A. Kofoid 
and Mr. Beardslee. In Walter Deane's herbarium, at 
Cambridge, Mass., there is a specimen of it from Ice 
Gulch, Randolph, N. H. (White Mountains), collected 
by J. R. Churchill in 1889, and Mr. Deane says that 
there is another specimen in the Gray herbarium from 
the Keweenaw peninsula. Lake Superior, collected by 
J. W. Robbins many years ago. I have had canes of 
a perfectly smooth blackberry sent me from northern 
Michigan (near Grand Traverse), and I have no doubt 
that they belong to this species, as the angular and 
furrowed, perfectly smooth canes of Rubus Millspaughii 
are easily distinguished from those of the common 
blackberry. From all these records, it would appear 
that the species occurs upon our northern borders, and 
that it follows the mountains southwards ; and this 
accounts for the finding of the specimen by Kalm, who 
traveled in Canada. 

"Now, as the canes of Rubus Millpaughii are per- 

*Linnien8 described the plant iis Jiubtu Canadensis, and that name innst 
replace R. Millspaughii, as explained in the succeeding pages.— X. JET. B. 1898. 


fectly thornless, it is important that horticulturists 
should turn their attention to the species if it gives 
any promise of good fruit. The so-called thornless 
blackberries of gardens are only comparatively unarmed 
forms of the common blackberry. The person who 
sent me the thornless canes from northern Michigan 
said that the fruit is good. Mr. Kofoid, who collected 
the specimens in North Carolina, sends me the following 
note; 4t seems to be very abundant where it occurs, 
forming dense thickets of upright stems five to eight 
feet in height. As late as the 29th of August we found 
the fruit just turning a faint reddish tinge, and quite 
palatable and sweet to a hungry man. Natives say 
that the fruit becomes ripe and black in September. 
The berries are large, long and slender and very 
sweet, lacking the sharply acid or bitterish quality 
of the berries of the lower mountains. There are 
no thorns or prickles. One can go through the 
patches unscathed. You may, however, find a few- 
minute prickles on the mid -vein, generally of the 
terminal leaflet.' This is certainly a promising 

^* There are several botanical characters which dis- 
tmguish this species from the common blackberry, aside 
from the absence of thorns. It lacks almost entirely, 
except on some of the young shoots, the conspicuously 
pubescent character of the common species. The leaves 
are thin and the leaflets are sharply toothed and promi- 
nently long -pointed. One of the most prominent 
characters lies in the leaflet -stalks. Upon vigorous 
shoots the leaflets are five, and the thi-ee upper ones 
have stalks from one to two inches long." 

It is now known that this interesting species is 


distributed from Lake Superior to the moantaios of 
North Carolina. It iB in cultivation in the Cornell 
gardens, but it seems to have little merit as a fruit 
plant. It will not be surprising, however, if good 

blukberiT. Kubut euaeifoliut. 

varieties are found iu the wild and are now and 
then introduced into cultivation. 

The Topsj- blackberry (Fig, 70) is a stifif-growing 
and exceedingly thorny bush, belonging to still another 
species, the Sand blackberry, or Riibus cuneifoUus. 
The wild plant is shown in Fig. 89. The fruits have 


large and loose, very black drupelets, and they are 
sour even when soft, and are not aromatic. The drupe- 
lets cling to the receptacle. In its wild state the Sand 
blackberry produces many varieties of excellent qual- 
ity, but the smallness of the fruits hinders their intro- 
duction into cultivation. 

J. T. Lovett, who introduced the Topsy blackberry, 
considers it (as he writes me) to be "a hybrid between 
the Sand blackberry and some other species, perhaps 
the dewberry, or probably Wilson's Early." I was 
long inclined to accept a hybrid origin for it, but 
having studied the Sand blackberry in the field, from 
New Jersey to Florida, I am convinced that it is only 
a direct variation of Buhus cuneifoUus. The Topsy 
was sent to Lovett about 1884 by a man in south 
Jersey. It was subsequently sent out by Childs as 
the Tree blackberry. Lovett dubbed it Topsy, because 
it is so "wicked" with thorns.* 

Hybrids between the raspberry and blackberry have 
been produced artificially by several persons. The 
following are records of experiments made by E. S. 
Carman, and printed in "The Rural New-Yorker" 
of various dates: 

"In the summer of 1886, we applied pollen of rasp- 
berry flowers to the stigmas of blackberry flowers, 
and vice versa. * * * Our work was continued 
assiduously during the entire period when blackberries 
and raspberries were simultaneously in bloom. Some 
twenty seeds formed on the blackberries, and perhaps 
twice as many on the raspberries. All were planted, 
separately, of course, in shallow boxes of mellow soil, 
as soon as they were taken from the fruit. In many 

*For accounts of all varieties of blackberries, see Card's ** Bush- Fruits.'' 


cases, a single drupe would form; sometimes two or 
three — rarely more, and never a perfect berr3\ With- 
out any experience to guide us in raising these fruits 
from seed, we unwisely took for granted that the 
fresh seed would sprout in a few weeks, and that the 
plants would grow to a size which, with protection, 
might be carried through the winter out of doors. 
They did not sprout, however, so that it was con- 
cluded to bury the boxes until February, and thus 
expose the seeds to the action of frost. The boxes 
were removed to the house early in February accord- 
ingly. Many of the raspberry seeds sprouted in a 
short time, though but nine lived to be set out the 
ensuing May (1887). The blackberry seeeds did not 
sprout at all. 

"TS6 Nine Hybrid Plants, — The following notes 
were taken last October. The first plant is 3 feet 
high, much branched, light green canes, covered with 
raspberrj- prickles. Leaflets large, with an occasional 
imperfect 5-pedate leaf. Under side of leaf glaucous. 
The second plant is 3% feet high, with but a single 
stem without laterals, and nearly without prickles. 
Scarcely any bloom on the under side of the leaf. 
Leaflets large and much wrinkled, as in the foreign 
raspberry. Stem purplish. The third is a puny plant, 
about 9 inches high, with the prickles of a rasp- 
berry, the leaf of a blackberry. The fourth is 2% 
feet high, long laterals, purple stem, hooked thorns, 
like the blackberry, but closer together. Leaflets 
small, no bloom on the under side. Resembles a 
blackberry more than a raspberry. The fifth seems 
to be a small, sickly raspberry, with slender, close- 
jointed stems. The sixth seems to be a thomless 


raspberry. The seventh has large, wrinkled leaflets, 
borne on two stems 2% feet high. The stems are 
light green on one side, light purple on the other. 
Prickles many and long, but slender and soft. Very 
little bloom under the leaves. A vigorous plant. The 
eighth has leaves resembling the blackberry, and with- 
out bloom. There were several pedate leaves. Prick- 
les hooked, crowded and stiff. It is very branching, 
and 2% feet high. Looks like a blackberry. The 
ninth is but 9 inches high, though healthy. It resem- 
bles the blackberry, except that the thorns are crowded 
and there are no pedate leaves." — February 18^ 1888, 

"In one box we have seeds of the raspberry crossed 
with the blackberry; in another, seeds of the black- 
berry crossed with the raspberry." — August 14, 1886. 

"Both the raspberry and blackberry buds were 
opened and the anthers removed while green. Pollen 
from each was applied to the other, and carefully 
wrapped up in tissue paper, to prevent contact of pol- 
len from bees or wind. About fifteen berries formed 
from this hybridization, three -fourths on the rasp- 
berry and the remainder on the blackberry. The 
seeds of the raspberry have already been sown, and 
those of the blackberries are to be planted when 
rii>e," September 11, 1886.— By Farm Ed. World. 

"Three of these plants have fruited the present 
season. The first is, to all appearances, a raspberry. 
The plant is very vigorous, the leaves very large, the 
canes nearly thomless, the berries yellow, of medium 
size, rather soft and of the quality of the Caroline. 
Imperfect berries were noticed here and there. The 
second bears a red berry of the same color, size and 
quality of the Hansell. Some of these berries were 


also observed to be imperfect. The third plant re- 
sembles a blackberry in every way, though the spines 
are less numerous and shorter. Some of the leaves 
consist of 5-pedate leaflets, as in. the blackberry pure 
and simple. The back part of the leaves has none of 
the whitish down or bloom common to the raspberry. 
The canes ai*e furrowed as in the blackberry. The 
flowers resemble those of the raspberry, and the drupes 
separate from the receptacle as in the raspberry. 

"The best berry bore 5 drupes. These were jet 
black, of large size, and of the raspberry flavor, in so 
far as could be judged. It will be remembered that 
these plants all came from raspberry mothers. If 
judged from the past season's behavior, it will appear 
that little is to be hoped from this hybridization. We 
have about fifteen plants which have not yet fruited, 
besides quite a number of hybrid seeds produced the 
present season." — Rural New-Yorker, 8ept. 22, 1888, 

"Another of 'The Rural New-Yorker's' blackberry- 
raspberry hybrids fruited during the past season — and 
another chance to record a failure. * * The plant 
is strong and vigorous, with characteristics both of 
the raspberry and blackberry. It resembles the black- 
berry, however, in most respects, though distinctly not 
a blackberry. There was not a perfect berry on the 
plant. It is an interesting fact that though the drupe- 
lets were those of the blackberry, the flower of the 
raspberry was pronounced. We have a dozen of these 
hybrids which have not yet fruited, but those which 
have fruited give little or no promise that anything 
of value will ever come from the hybridization beyond 
the interesting fact itself." — Rural New-Yorker, 
November 23, 1889. 


The Dewberries 

Within the past few years several varieties of dew- 
berries have come into more or less prominence. The 
greatest diflferences of opinion exist as to their merits, 
and few systematic attempts have been made to deter- 
mine their peculiarities and values. Some of them 
must possess value for certain purposes, for they 
have been strongly recommended by many growers 
and dealers ; and it is also to be considered that the 
presumption is against any new fruit, especially one 
which has been rescued from the fields, and any com- 
mendation which it receives from honest men is proof 
that it possesses some points of usefulness. The 
histories of fruits are soon lost, and all definite 
knowledge of methods of variation and degrees of 
improvement is, therefore, impossible. This is no- 
where better illustrated than in the dewberries them- 
selves, for although they are among the most recent 
additions to our fruits, I have found it impossible 
to learn the exact histories of all of them. 

At first thought it seems strange that such 
unqualified encomiums and sweeping condemnations 
could be bestowed upon any fruit as have fallen to 
the lot of the dewberry. But there are reasons for 
these disagreements, some of which the following 
pages may discover. Most fruits receive both praise 
and censure, for there are few which succeed in 
all parts of the country and under all kinds of 
management ; and if the fruit is wholly new in 
kind, it is particularly liable to be misunderstood 
and mismanaged. But it further turns out, upon 
investigation, that the varieties of dewberries are very 


dissimilar, and, therefore, not always comparable with 
each other and not equally adapted to given con- 
ditions. In fact, they represent various distinct spe- 
cies, and marked natural or botanical varieties. It is, 
therefore, necessary, before proceeding to a discussion 
of their horticultural values, to distinguish their 
botanical characteristics. A few years ago, I made 
an attempt to discover the botanical features of the 
dewberries, and the results were published in the 
"American Garden" for November, 1890, and Feb- 
ruary, 1891, the former issue containing the first 
accurate drawing of the Lucretia. A horticultural 
and botanical monograph of the dewberries was also 
the subject of Bulletin 34 (November, 1891) of the 
Cornell Experiment Station ; and a subsequent sketch 
was made in Bulletin 117 of same station. The main 
features of the present account of the dewberries 
are drawn from those papers. 

In common speech, the word dewberry is applied 
to any trailing blackberry. There are several distinct 
species or types of trailing blackberries, with only 
the most prominent of which we need to concern our- 
selves at present. It would seem as if the dewberries 
could be at once distinguished from the true or bush 
blackberries by their trailing habit, but there are 
forms of wild blackberries which are low and decum- 
bent, as we have seen in the account of the hybrid 
blackberry -dewberry tribe. The botanies have even 
described a true trailing form of the bush blackberry 
(var. humifusus) , but this variety was founded upon 
a dewberry itself, and it has now been described as a 
distinct species under the name of Ruhus Bailey anus. 
It turns out, however, that it was described so long 


ago as 1823, under the name of Rubm Enslenii, There 
is no true trailing form of the bush or common 
blackberry (page 352). The best distinction between 
the dewberries and bush blackberries lies in the inflo- 
rescence or flower clusters. In the dewberries the flower 
clusters are cymose — the center flower opening first, — 
and the flowers are few and scattered. In the black- 
berries, on the other hand, the clusters are essentially 
corv'mbose or racemose — the lower or outer flowei-s 
generally opening first — and the flowers are usually 
borne in rather dense clusters. The dewberries are 
also distinguished by propagating from "tips," while 
the blackberries propagate by suckers. 

All the trailing blackberries, therefore, are specific- 
ally unlike the bush blackberries. They are all dew- 
berries. Every one of my readers who has tramped 
over fields, either in the northern or the southern 
states, will recall the sprawling, thorny plants, with 
their little sour fruits and their red-brown autumn 

Dewberries seem to be first mentioned as a culti- 
vated fruit in 1863, in a report of the Fruit Growers' 
Society of Western New York, when it was said that 
Dr. Miner, of Honeoye Falls, had two varieties in cul- 
tivation. These varieties were not named. 

The first variety of dewberry to come promi- 
nently before the public was the Lucretia (Fig. 71). 
The story of its discovery and introduction is told 
me by B. F. Albaugh, of Covington, Miami county, 
Ohio, who introduced it to the trade. A young man 
named Williams enlisted in the civil war from Miami 
county, Ohio^ During most of his service he was 
stationed in West Virginia, part of the time near 


'[([''I'lj'l Beverly. While guarding 
~ private property there he 
became acquainted with the 
woman who afterwards be- 
came his wife. He settled 
\ ,|l on her plantation after the 
|\ I war, and upon it found the 

;| dewberries growing wild. 
He transplanted some to bis 
garden, and these attracted 
the attention of his father, 
who visited him in 1875. 
The following year plants 
were sent to the father in 
Ohio, and they were distrib- 
uted among a few friends. 
The plants were carelessly 
dug, however, and only five 
of the genuine variety hap- 
pened to be in the lot, and 
these, along with many 

Ik worthless ones, chanced to 
fall into the hands of Mr. 
Albaugh. From these five 
plants tbe present stock has 
sprung. When the variety 
was offered for sale Mr. Al- 
baugh named it Lucretia, 
for Mrs. Lucretia Garfield. 
Mr. Albaugh told me that 
the five original plants were 
vigorous and fruitful in 1891, 
A portion of one of the 


original plants — about one -ninth of it — was exhibited 
at the Association of American Nurserymen at Wash- 
ington, in June, 1886. This specimen bore 978 ber- 
ries. E. Y. Teas, now of Irvington, Ind., appears to 
have been the first to figure the Lucretia and to 
offer plants for sale. 

The Lucretia, like all dewberries, has made its 
way into popular favor slowly. People have not yet 
learned how to grow these fruits easily and success- 
fully. Many persons laboriously tie them up on wire 
screens (Pig. 72) or trellises, but the best results — 
considering the outlay — are obtained when the canes 
are tied to stakes. In this fashion, they are man- 
aged more easily than blackberries, and the earliness 
of the fruit — ripening a week or two in advance of 
the blackberries — makes the plant a useful one to the 
enterprising grower of small fruits. 

Another prominent dewberry is the Bartel; and 
it enjoys the distinction of being the first dewberry, 
as far as I know, to receive a name. It was brought 
to notice some time early in the seventies by Dr. 
Bartel of Huey, Clinton county, southern Illinois. 
The story goes that the plants appeared in an old 
corn-field upon his farm, and some of the berries 
were so large that he conceived the idea of selling 
plants. He procured a lithograph of the berries, — 
which did ample justice to the fruit, — described the 
methods of growing them, and for a time disposed of 
considerable stock. The introducer was an old man at 
this time, and was one of those clever and pictui^sque 
individuals who often lend an interest to a neighbor- 
hood. The first printed record of this berry appeared 
in December, 1875, in Purdy's "Fruit Recorder" 


(p. 182). This is a communication from '*T. C. 
Bartles, of Clinton county, Illinois/' and is headed 
"Bartles' Mammoth Dewberry." The description of 
the berry runs as follows: "This is a very fine berry, 
ripening from the last of June until the middle of 
August. The fruit is very large, rich and juicy, 
slightly acid, but not so sour as the blackberry. 
When ripe it is black, and is sufficiently solid to 
bear shipment with safety. I have had berries over 
two inches in length and one inch in diameter. They 
are a perpetual bearer from the time they begin to 
ripen (in ordinary seasons) until the last of August — 
having blossoms on the same vine simultaneously 
with the ripe fruit. They are very prolific, yielding 
in a fair season from sixty to eighty bushels to an 
acre. They do not blossom until late in the spring — 
later than the strawberry — the fruit maturing in 
from four to six weeks after blossoming — hence they 
are seldom if ever injured by late frosts in the 
spring. They are very hardy — having succeeded as 
far north as Wisconsin and the northern part of 
Iowa." An account of methods of cultivation is then 
given. "I shipped some of my dewberries to New 
York city from this place, for which I received six- 
teen dollars per bushel. I also shipped to Rockford, 
111., St. Louis, Mo., and to Independence, Iowa, for 
which I received twelve dollars and eighty cents per 
bushel; while the highest price paid for strawberries 
did not exceed, on an average, six dollars and forty 
cents per bushel. I consider the dewberry the most 
profitable fruit raised." Mr. Purdy gave roots of 
this dewberry as a premium to his paper at this 
time, and among those who obtained it were I. N. 


Stone, of Port Atkinson, Wis., and Hon. B. F. 
Adams, of Madison, Wis., the only pereons, probably, 
as Mr. Stone writes me, "who had sufficient confi- 
dence in it to give it a fair trial/' Mr. Stone has 
made a marked success of its culture, and all the 
plants set in recent years appear to have come directly 
or indirectly from him. 

The first good account of the Bartel was published 
in "Garden and Forest," in 1891, by Professor Goff. 
"In the summer of 1889," Professor Goff writes, 
"I saw a small plantation of Bartel on the grounds of 
Mr. H. C. Adams, of Madison, Wis., that at once 
established my faith in the possibilities of this fruit 
[dewberry] . I was informed that the most productive 
season had passed at the time of my visit, and that 
the berries which I saw were inferior in size to those 
gathered a few days earlier. But at this time the 
vines were fairly well loaded with fruit of larger size 
and more attractive appearance than the finest black- 
berries, and, to my taste, altogether superior in quality. 
There is a juicy, melting quality in the dewberry that 
is scarcely equaled by any other fruit of my acquaint- 
ance. The fact that the dewberry is prostrate in its 
habit of growth is a decided objection to it in climates 
where winter protection is unnecessary. But in regions 
of severe winters, the ease with which the plants may 
be covered is a partial recompense for this fault. It 
is said that a plantation once started is eradicated 
from the soil with considerable difficulty, which, if 
true, is an additional objection to the plant in culti- 
vation. I consider Bartel dewberry worthy of trial by 
all who are interested in testing new fruits. Mr. 
Adams, who is an extensive grower of blackberries, 



has found this variety more profitable as a market 
fruit than any blackberries he has grown." The 
Bartel dewberry is not generally known, even now ; 
but a few persons grow it with much satisfaction. 

All this history of the Bartel dewberry is simple 
enough, as one reads it, but some weeks of labor were 
consumed in discovering the facts. This is but another 
illustration of the fact that few useful records are 
made of plant variation and of horticultural history. 
Even the proper spelling of the name was not known 
until this history was recorded in the Cornell Bulletin, 
seven years ago. It was variously written Bartle, 
Bartles', Bartell and Bartells', but I have the evidence 
of a neighbor of the introducer, who is now dead, 
that he spelled his name Bartel. 

The reader may be interested to know how this 
history was obtained. In the first place, it may be 
said that there was no record of the origin of the 
variety to be found in the many books or journals 
to which the writer had access. He then wrote to 
Mr. Adams and Mr. Stone, whose success with this 
dewberry has been mentioned, asking where they 
obtained the variety. One of them replied that he 
obtained it years before as a premium to Purdy's 
"Small -Fruit Recorder," a periodical which had dis- 
continued publication. The writer had no file of this 
journal ; but the editor is living, and he therefore 
wrote him for information. The editor replied that 
the correspondent was evidently mistaken, that he 
had not offered the berry as a premium, to the 
best of his memory, and that he knew nothing of it. 
Yet the correspondent was positive in reasserting 
liis statements, and, thinking that the lapse of time 


might have dimmed the editor's memory, I set about 
to procure a file of the eighteen volumes of the 
journal. The set was found and purchased. One of 
the volumes contained an account of the dewberry, 
written by "T. C. Bartles, of Clinton county, Illinois," 
as already quoted, but the narrative gave no infor- 
mation as to the origin of the berry. It was neces- 
sary, therefore, to discover the address of Mr. Bartles 
and to correspond with him, but I could not secure 
his address. The editor did not remember it. In 
vain every horticultural and agricultural report of 
Illinois was scanned. Files of periodicals were 
searched. When every resource seemed to have 
been exhausted, a catalogue of a western spray - 
pump manufacturer fell into my hands, in which was 
a testimonial of the pumps signed by T. C. Bartles, 
Clinton county, Illinois ! The catalogue maker sup- 
plied the post office address. But it turned out that 
this T. C. Bartles, of Huey, Clinton county. 111., 
was a townsman but not kinsman of Dr. Bartel, the 
man who introduced the berry! Dr. Bartel had died 
some years before, but Mr. Bartles was able to supply 
the history. 

It is only within the last ten years that the dew- 
berries have attracted much attention from horticul- 
turists. The varieties have now increased to twenty or 
more, every one of which seems to have been picked 
up in the wild. If we would understand these varie- 
ties, we must look more closely into the botanical fea- 
tures of the dewberries. The three commonest species 
of dewberries are Rubus villosns {Rubus Canadensis 
of all writers), R, hispidus, and R. trivialis. The 
first two are northern species and the last southern. 


Bubus hispidus (Fig. 73) is a very slender plant, 
rarely rising at all above the surface of the gi-onnd, 
and growing both in swamps and upon barren sand. 
The leaflets are obovate, stiff, and shining above. The 
flowers are few and very small, and the fruit is small 
and usually red. The species appears to possess no 
value as a fruit, and yet it is often confounded with 
Rubus villosus {B. Canadensis of the books), which is 
the parent of some of our cultivated varieties. 

The Bubtis villosus, to which the term dewberry is 
usually restricted in the North, is much like the south- 
ern dewberry, Biibns trivialis, in appearance. The 
chief distinguishing points are these : 

Bubus villosus y or northern dewberry (Fig. 74). 
Main stems or canes rather sparsely and slightly 
prickly ; leaves thin and deciduous, either destitute of 
prickles or bearing only weak ones, and more or less 
hairy ; leaflets ovate ; sepals often prolonged and leaf- 
like, and sometimes lobed. (See, also, pp. 371-374.) 

Bubus trivialis, or southern dewberry. Main canes 
mostly thickly beset with stout prickles ; leaves firm 
and nearly or quite evergreen, smooth or very nearly 
so, the petioles or midribs usually bearing stout 
prickles ; leaflets oval -oblong or almost lanceolate and 
small ; sepals not prolonged nor cut. This species is 
common from Delawai-e to Florida and Texas, on the 
sandy lands. The canes often grow ten or fifteen feet 
in length. It is variable, and attractive varieties are 
often found. Some forms have even been mentioned 
as possessing value as oraamental plants. (Seep. 376.) 

The northern dewberry is a very variable species. 
In any locality where it grows in abundance a number 
of unlike forms may usually be found. Some of the 


forms are probjibly worthy i>i biduu- 
ieal mimes. To this speoits or its 
Itotanicnl varieties most of the culti- 
vated dewberries belong. It is it^jul 
ily divided into two sectious or siii>- ^ 
tyiH;s : 

1. The common dew- /"_ 
berries, Bubus villosus (or^^ 
It. C((»«denm) proper. The 
leaves vary greatly in size 
and shape, those upoa the 
bearing eanes being small, 
while those upon growing 
canes may be nearly as 
large as the leaves of 

Pour varieties of this 
type of Bubus villosus are 
iu cultivation: 

WiNDOM, first brought 
into prominent notice in 
1887 by the Seedling Com- 
mission of the Minnesota 
State Horticultural Society. 
The report of J. S. Harris, 
one of the Commission, is 
as follows : "At Windom 
[Cottonwood county] we 
met Dewaiu Cook, of Dale 
township, a wide-awake 
man, who is pursuing fruit 
culture under many dis- 
advantages. He has difi- 


covered and is cultivating a hardy dewberry, which, if 
it comes near up to what he claims for it, will prove of 
great value to our lists of hardy fruits. It has been 
cultivated here thirteen years. We have many testi- 
monials showing its hardiness, productiveness, fair size, 
and good quality of fruit, etc., and have secured plants 
and had them sent to several of our experiment stations 
to be tested and reported upon." A. W. Sias, one of 
the Commission, writes me as follows: "In the fall of 
1887, J. S. Harris, Rev. G. W. Fuller and myself were 
on the Seedling Commission of the Minnesota State Hor- 
ticultural Society, and while acting in this capacity Mr. 
Harris and myself visited Dewain Cook, at Windom, and 
were greatly pleased with the dewberry. His plants were 
very heavily loaded with good fruit. The fruit is small 
— perhaps not more than half the size of Lucretia — but 
what it lacks in size it more than makes up in quality. 
I purchased 1,000 plants of Mr. Cook while at his place, 
and set them on a very heavy clay. While they suc- 
ceeded much better than the Mammoth and Lucretia 
near by, they did not equal Mr. Cook's plants, which 
were on soil containing some sand." The variety 
appears to have been sent out as early as 1886, at least 
to experiment stations. It was first known as Cook's 
Hardy. The exact origin of this dewberry is not known. 
Mr. Cook informs me that he obtained his plants from 
a neighbor, J. Q. Pickett, who had been growing them 
for seventeen or eighteen years, but who refuses to dis- 
close the origin of the variety. Mr. Pickett came from 
Iowa, and it is commonly thought that he brought the 
dewberry with him and that it grew wild in that state. 
Mr. Cook resides near the Mennonites, and some have 
supposed that the variety was originally introduced by 


them from Russia, but I fail to find anything in the 
botanical features of the plant which leads me to sus- 
pect any other than an American origin. 

LucBETiA^s Sister, discovered, or at least intro- 
duced, by J. B. Treedway, of Brandt, Miami county, 
Ohio, about 1886. I grew it in 1887, and a sprig of 
the plant is illustrated in the "American Garden" for 
February, 1890. It appeared to possess no value with 
me, and I have not grown it since. It appears never 
to have attained to any reputation. 

Geer, discovered in a wood -lot upon the property 
of a Mrs. Geer, of Plainfleld, Livingston county, Mich., 
by F. L. Wright, a horticulturist of that place. Plants 
were transferred to the garden in 1887, but it is not 
generally introduced. It is a small berry, but a fair 

Mayes, or Austin. This berry, with which I have 
small acquaintance, seems to be a large and strong form 
of Riihus villosus (common dewberry). It is a Texan 
variety, and was first described in the "Horticulturist," 
Pilot Point, Texas, for December, 1889. It is said to 
be "a supposed cross between the common dewberry 
and the native Texas blackberry." The history of this 
berry is given me as follows by Dr. A. M. Bagland: 

"About the year 1879 I purchased a hundred acre 
tract of land three miles east of Pilot Point, on Pecan 
creek. South of this and joining it was a tract which 
was purchased about two years later by John Mayes. 
There was only a wire cross fence between the farms. 
On both of these tracts of laud, east of Pecan creek, 
there were twenty -five or thirty acres covered with 
dewberry and the wild Texas or Dallas blackberrj'. 
These dewberries were the common dewberry found 


growing in many places in Texas and Louisiana. 
People from our town were in the habit of visiting 
this dewberry and blackberry field every spring, to 
gather first the dewberries, and later the blackberries. 
After Mr. Mayes came into possession of the farm, he 
began to cultivate the land where these berries grew, 
and discovered this berry occupying a small area of 
not more than half an acre, or an acre at most. The 
berries were so much finer than the other dewberries 
growing all around it, that he decided to save them. 
He plowed them, and found they grew firm, and so he 
began bringing his surplus above home consumption 
to town to sell. Their large size and earliness at- 
tracted the attention of our Pilot Point Horticultural 
Society, so that a member asked Mr. Mayes to bring 
them plants — one or two hundred each. Among 
those purchasing them at this time were Mr. J. W. 
Austin, Mr. Sam Gaines and myself. That was about 
1888 or 1889. Since then these berries have con- 
tinued to grow in popular favor. The name, Mayes 
Hybrid, was suggested by myself, because the plants 
were found growing where both the common dewberry 
(Riibus trimaUs) and common Texas blackberry, now 
known as the Dallas berry, were both occupying the 
locality indiscriminately. Col. W. W. Ross, who then 
lived here, and myself proposed to Mr. Mayes to 
call it the Mayes Hybrid and form a company, known 
as the Mayes Berry Company, to propagate and sell the 
plants. I first advertised them in ^The Horticulturist' 
as the Mayes Hybrid Blackberry." 

J. W. Austin, of Pilot Point, Texas, also propa- 
gated the plant, and introduced it as Austin's Im- 
proved Dewberry, 


The Maynard, a Kansas variety, is one of the nov- 
elties. It has a peculiar habit, intermediate between 
Bubus villosus and the blackberry, but it seems to be 
nearer the former. Card considers it a hybrid. 

2. The Lucretia sub -type, variety rorihaccus 
(Fig. 71). As compared with Bubus villosus proper, 
this variety is a much larger and stronger grower; 
leaves large and the margins doubly serrate with small 
teeth, and more or less notched or jagged : leaflets 
broad at or below the middle, sometimes triangu- 
lar-ovate ; peduncles or flower stems much longer, 
straighter and stouter, more erect, habitually more 
numerous and more conspicuously overtopping the 
leaves ; flowers very large and show^'^ (often two 
inches across) ; sepals uniformly larger, some of them 
much prolonged and leaf -like and conspicuously lobed 
(sometimes becoming an inch long and wide); fruit 
much longer and larger as a rule, and more or less 
thimble -shaped. Strong forms of Bubus villosus 
itself often look much like this in foliage, but I 
have never seen any in which there was such a de- 
velopment of long flower stems, large flowers and 
fruits, and large sepals. The Lucretia appears to 
be the only variety of this sub -type in cultivation. 

The Bartel type, or Bubus ininsus, is particularly 
distinguished by the large and nearly simple t^eth of 
the leaves and the very long and ascending flower 
stems. Canes stout and stiff, often partially ascending; 
leaflets larger than in B. villosus, broad and thin, 
smooth or very nearly so, the teeth usually very large, 
simple and often rounded and terminating in a minute 
point ; peduncles or flower stems long and straight ; 
young flower buds commonly bearing a prominent tip 


formed by the eoiiiiiveut ends of the sepals ; flowers 
commoDly larger than in R. villosus. As the wild 

plant grows in New York, and as it is seen in the 
cultivated varieties, it appears to be very dtstinet from 
Eubua villoaus. But there may be intermediate 


forms, and the botanical rank of the species cannot be 
fully determined until our rubuses have received further 
study. The cut (Fig. 75) shows a flowering stem of 
tlie wild plant which grows at Ithaca, New York. It 
grows here upon a rocky hillside, completely covering: 
the ground with a tangled mat a foot or a foot and a 
half thick. The first ripe fruits on this wild patch 
appear lat-e in July. The fruits are small, containing* 
from six to eighteen drupelets, and ai-e of no value. 
In cultivation, this type has given us the Bart^l, 
already mentioned, and the three following : 

General Grant, introduced by Charles A. Green, 
of Rochester, N. Y., in 1885 or 1886, as a premium to 
his "Fruit Grower." It came from M. W. Broyles, 
somewhere in Tennessee. Mr. Green informs me that 
the variety did not prove to be as valuable as repre- 
sented to him, and he therefore dropped it. I first grew 
the variety in 1886, and it seems to possess little value. 
The variety has never become prominent. 

Never Fail. I know this only from a specimen and 
notes sent me by F. L. Wright, Plainfield, Mich., who 
obtained it from some person in central Indiana. He 
says : "It never fails to produce an abundance of wood, 
but always fails to produce fruit. I never had a perfect 
berry." It is said to have originated in central Ohio. 

Mammoth. There are certainly two plants sold 
under this name, one being Ruhus intnsus and the other 
apparently true Ruhus villosus. The former is, I think, 
the same as Bartel, but the history and characteristics 
of the latter I have been unable to trace. 

So far as I can learn, the commoner Mammoth dew- 
berry offered by nurserymen is only the Bartel, and 
the plants which I have grown and seen of it appear to 


be the same. The origiual name of the Bartel was 
Barters Mammoth, and it is now often sold under this 
name, and sometimes Bartel is omitted. I have written 
to nurserymen who advertise the Mammoth, and all the 
replies which I have received state that Bartel, BartePs 
Mammoth and Mammoth are the same. It is a common 
impression among growers and experimenters, however, 
that the two are distinct, perhaps because they were 
received under different names. Mr. Lvon, in the 
Michigan report of new fruits, published in 1883, 
savs that the "Mammoth is another variety of similar 
character [to Bartel] scarcely more productive. Ripe 
August 1." Separate reports of Bartel and Mammoth 
are given by the New York State Experiment Station, 
and Professor Goff speaks of them as different in his 
articles already quoted in "Garden and Forest," 1891. 
But no one, so far as I can learn, has pointed out any 
differences between the two. 

One of the replies to my inquiries of nurserymen, 
from a very prominent western firm, is as follows: "As 
to Mammoth, we verily believe there is in reality no 
specific variety generally distributed and known under 
this name. Twenty years ago Dewey, the plate maker, 
had a plate called * Mammoth Prolific Dewberry,' and so 
long ago as 1873 we scoured the country over trying to 
find a few hundred of something by this name for a 
customer who had sold them from the aforesaid plate, 
but could not learn of anything of the kind then in 
existence. Since the introduction of Lucretia, a firm 
in Jackson county. 111., brought out a variety they 
called Mammoth, and while we are not absolutely sure, 
we think it was merely a wild variety which thev took 
up, propagated, and gave this name. We obtained 


plants and have had them in caltivation for a number of 
years. We do not know but that they have done about 
as well as Lucretia, though we must say that none of the 
dewberries have been particularly satisfactory with us." 

I mistrust that the plate referred to is the one which 
Dr. Bartel had made for his variety. I have been 
unable to learn the historj' of the plate. It seems to 
have made no impression upon the nurserymen of 
western New York, where Dewey, the plate maker, 
lived, and I have not been able to find a copy of it. I 
feel sure that the common Mammoth is the Bartel. 

The other Mammoth is the one referred to in the 
letter above quoted as coming from a firm in Jackson 
county, 111. I understand this firm to be Bailey 
& Hanford, which is now dissolved. I have been 
unable to get any direct statement of the variety. I 
have received the plant from a party who obtained it 
indirectly from Bailey & Hanford, and it is distinct 
from Bartel, for it belongs, apparently, to the type form 
of Rubus vUlosus. I know nothing yet of the value of 
this Mammoth, but it is certain that it has not become 
generally known. 

In regard to this confusion, Mr. Stone writes me as 
follows: "The Bartel was introduced as Bartel Mam- 
moth, and is generally known by this name now, but 
the word Mammoth has been dropped by some on ac- 
count of there having been an entirely worthless variety 
called Mammoth sent out quite extensively. It is for 
this reason that I have dropped Mammoth. The variety 
sent out under the name had a much larger cane and 
blossomed freely, but never set any fruit; at least this 
was the ease with the stock I had." 

There are many other interesting forms of the 



comiDon dewberry which will no doubt be introduced 
into cultivation in the course of time. The features 
of the (species have not been closely studied by bot- 
anists. I cannot forbear, in passing, to speak of one 
very promising form which I have collected in the 
drifting sand upon the bants of Lake Michigan, in 

Flc. TO. 

sonthwestern Michigan. This is a very leafy and 
vigorous, long-running plant, which produces large 
globular -oblong fruits of excellent quality, and which 
seems to be distinguished from all other dewberries in 
the very deep and sharp, irregular teeth of the leaves. 
(Pig. 76.) In my herbarium, Professor Card has named 
this plant Rubus villosiis var. Michiijnnensis (see p. 374). 


A plant which has long been confounded with 
Bubus villosus is the Bubus Enslenil, or Bubus Bailey- 
anus of Britton ("List of Pteridophyta and Sperma- 
tophyta," 185, 1894). This is a slender plant, with 
weak spines or none, and almost herbaceous shoots, 
small flowers mostly in 1- or 2 -flowered clusters, and 
very broad and thin, doubly toothed leaves (Fig. 87). 
It seems to be a good species. It occurs freely in 
eastern New York and in Pennsylvania, and I have 
collected it in southwestern Michigan. It is probably 
generally distributed in the northwestern states. This 
is the plant which Torrey had in mind when he 
founded Bubus villosus var. humifusus (Fig. 77), 
which has ejected so much unnecessary confusion 
into the knowledge of the high -bush blackberry, for 
this blackberry has no trailing forms (page 331). The 
picture (page 353) is a photograph of Torrey ^s origi- 
nal specimens, collected at West Point. 

The southern dewberry, Bubus (rivialis, is repre- 
sented in cultivation by the Manatee, introduced in 
1889 by Eeasoner Brothers, Manatee, Fla.; Bauer, 
Sent out in 1890 by Bauer's Nursery, Judsonia, 
Ark.; Wilson's White, introduced in 1890 by Samuel 
Wilson, Mechanicsville, Penna. (native of Texas); 
probably the Fairfax, sent out about 1884, by C. A. 
Uber, Fairfax county, Va. 

The Pacific coast also has a native dewberry, and, 
like most ru buses, its nomenclature is confused. The 
species is not only perplexingly variable, but some 
plants produce only pistillate flowers, others only stami- 
nate, whereas others bear perfect flowers. It appears to 
have been first described by Chamisso & Schlechtendal 
in "Linn89a," in 1827, as Bubus vitif alius j or vine- 


leaved bramble. Ou the following page, in the same 
volume, the same aiithurs dcsi Tided another form of the 
species as Riihnx Hrxhius, aud this is the name by which, 


though improperly, the plaut is usualh' known. In 
18'J3, Douglas deserU>e<l it as Rubas MacropeialHjfi. 
Four named varieties of Rubas Hiifolius are in enltiva- 
tion, the Skagit Chief, Washington Climbing blackberrj-. 
Belle of Washington, and Aughinbaugh. The first, as 
I have grown it, is pistillate, and therefore incapable of 
setting fruit; and it blooms too early to be pollinated 
by our eastern dewl>erries, even if the speeies were to 
admit of sueh eross-xM>llination. The Skagit Chief 
(Fig. 78) and Belle of Washington are chance varieties 
from the wild, and they were distributed sparingly to 
experimenters late in 1891. The Washington Climbing 
was introduced in 1892 by Samuel Wilson, Mechanies- 
ville, Penna. 

Tlie Aughin})augh variety is described in "Garden 
and Forest " for 1894, as follows, by Charles Howard 
Shinn : 

"In blackberries, the Pacific coast has one verj* 
variable but important species, Bubus ursinus [1?. 
vitifolius]^ bearing an oblong, sweet, highly flavored 
fruit. This beny still grows in immense patches along 
the river bottoms, fills the ravines, and even extends 
far up among the oaks and manzanitas on di*y hill- 
sides. If it fruited abundantly it might long ago 
have become the parent of many valuable varieties, 
as has been the case with the blackberry. Occasion- 
ally, in rich, sheltered places it bears so heavily that 
people come for miles to camp in the berry -fields and 
gather the delicious fruit. Variable in growth, in 
leaves, and in many other particulars, it seems to vary 
most in fruitage, and offei-s peculiar advantages to the 
skilled hybridizer. As with other members of the 
family, carefully selected plants from the woods and 


hilla, transplanted to the garden, amply repay attention. 
A white variety, found in Del Norte county, has been 
somewhat disseminated in California, and several other 
varieties have gained some local reputation. * * * 

"The most remarkable sport of the native black- 
berry is the Aughinhangh. The Anghinbangh was 
found growing wild on the sandy Eucinal, or peninsula 


of Alameda, a good many years ago, by a pioneer who 
once owned many acres there. Aaghinbaugh removed 
it to his garden, cultivated and disseminated it. He 
lost his estate, and died in poverty; a city is built over 
his pasture lands, but the wild berry vine he trans- 
planted from under the oak forest which then covered 
the Almeda shore has preserved his name from obliv- 
ion. The Aughinbaugh blackberry, as I have grown 
it from from his original stock, is a beautiful vine of 
trailing habit, like a dewberry, but with much larger, 
darker leaves, and of extremely vigorous growth. 
Being pistillate, it does not bear well unless planted 
with other varieties. Properly fertilized, on good soil, 
and well trained on a fence or trellis, its bearing 
powers are often astonishing, and in quality it is very 
fine, but it has never become popular. I may add that 
for some reason the nurseries did not take it up, and 
one only finds it now in a few old gardens. Still it 
ought to be more generally distributed. It has been 
crossed with Crandall's Early, producing a promising 
line of seedlings." 

Wickson, in his "California Fruits," says that the 
Aughinbaugh — which is the " most famous" of the native 
blackberries or dewberries — was "propagated and sold 
by a man of that name about 1875. It achieved some 
popularity, but, being a pistillate variety, needed asso- 
ciation with other berries to fertilize it. For this and 
other reasons it became unpopular, and has been 
nearly lost sight of." 

Wickson also makes the following account of this 
Bubus vit if alius: "The most delicious wild fruit of 
California, and at the same time the most important 
commercially, is the .blackberry. We have one very 

BPHBBBBBBBB^BBi^BBiWBiWWWBWBii^Pii^BBBHJ|^F^^^^ Ki]73fci"T a u j m ^ mi * t^ '- .j ^r-s" 


variable species, bearing an oblong, very sweet and 
desirable fruit. It was favorably mentioned by early 
explorers, was highly esteemed by the Indians, and still 
plays an important part in domestic economy from 
Ventura county northward along the coast range. A 
variety of this species has attained some fame as a 
* white blackberry/ It is said that about 1860, parties 
gathering blackberries about half a mile from Crescent 
City, Del Norte county, discovered a few bushes or 
vines loaded with a berry exactly in shape of the black- 
berry, but of a white or cream color. The whole patch 
did not extend beyond a space of a dozen feet square, 
but the vines were luxuriant and bore well. It was a 
great curiosity, and the place and the berry were much 
sought for. Since that time the vines have spread 
gradually over a space of perhaps half an acre of 
ground. Plants have been taken from this locality to 
different parts." 

Remaining Types of Blackberry-like Plants 

There are various other species of rubuses which 
bear edible and attractive fruits, but which have not yet 
become prominent in cultivation, or are known only in 
the wild state. The most remarkable of these remain- 
ing types is the Logan-berry (Fig. 79), which was intro- 
duced to the public in 1893 by the California Agricul- 
tural Experiment Station. The Pacific coast botanists 
and horticulturists seem to be agreed that this singular 
berry is a hybrid of the Aughinbaugh dewberry crossed 
by the Old World type of red raspberry, Ruhus Idcens, 
The history of the plant is given by Charles Howard 
Shinn in "Garden and Forest" for November 21, 1894: 



"The Logau-berrj- originated several years ago in 
the garden of Judge J. H, Logan, of Santa Cmz, from 
self-sown seeds of the Aughinbaugh springing up iu 
the moist, warm soil of that sheltered district. The 
other parent is supposed to be a raspberry of the Red 
Antwerp type Raspberries of several sorts grew 

Fig. 78. Lest ot Loimn-beiTT. 

alongside, and, in fact, inteiraingled. The Logan -berry 
shows so clearly the mingling of both types that no 
horticulturist who studies the fruit has doubted that it 
is a true hybrid of Aughinbaugh blackberry with some 
large red European raspberry. The result is a very 
sturdy plant of rambling or trailing growth, needing 
support to be at its best, but even in this dry climate it 



is a vine of unusual substance and healthfulness, re- 
sembling the Aughinbaugh blackberry, but readily dis- 
tinguished from it in the field. The berry is large and 
solid, resembling the Aughinbaugh in shape, and re- 
taining its delicious wild flavor. It is dark red to 
purple when fully ripe, and shows in texture, in the 
easy slipping from the core, and partly in flavor, the 
raspbeny parentage. 

"Tests made in different soils and in some very dry 
situations have shown so far, that the Logan -berry will 
grow and bear a fair amount of fruit in localities where 
the gooseberry, currant, high -bush varieties of black- 
berries and dewberries have entirelv failed. As I have 
said, plants of Euhus ursinus are sometimes found 
thriving very well on dry hillsides wdth scrub oaks and 
chaparral, but seldom bear fruit to any extent in such 
arid places. In other words, some individuals of this 
variable species of rubus grow in very hot, arid and 
barren pla(^es, and the original Aughinbaugh, though 
found on a sandy peninsula near the bay, instead of on 
a hillside, seems to have had the power to transmit this 
resistant quality, together with an increased produc- 

"The Logan -berry is now grown for market near 
Santa Cruz and Watson ville, and the results are said to 
be gratifying, both in regard to price and yield. Like 
the blackberry, the season is a long one, but I have no 
data from the berry gardens. It is certain, however, 
that the area planted is being extended rapidly. The 
Logan -berry is hardy wherever tested in California, but 
this proves nothing in respect to its value in colder 
climates, though its wild blackberry blood must be an 
advantage, possibly suflBcient to counteract the weaker 


Red Antwerp cross. The fact that hardly a trace of the 
raspberry remains in vine, leaf, or general appearance 
supports this view." 

At this writing, the Logan -berry has not been suf- 
ficiently tested in the east to enable one to pass upon 
its merits as a competitor of the blackberry and dew- 
berry. (See Bulletin 45, Rhode Island Experiment 
Station, for an account of its behavior in the east.) 
Although I have not had opportunity to studj' this 
berry in the field, I am unable to detect evidences of 
hybridity in herbarium specimens of it; and it does 
not appear to present characters which could not 
readily be derived directly from Ruhus vitifolitis. 

Another western blackberry which has been much 
talked about, and which is said to be very promising for 
the Pacific coast, is the Oregon Everbearing blackberrj'. 
It has also been called the Evergreen and Climbing 
blackberr5\ This is Rubus laciniatus, a plant long ago 
described by Willdenow, and the nativity of which is 
unknown. It is now generally agreed that it is a 
cut -leaved form of the common Euroi)ean bramble or 
blackberry, Rubus frufieosus. It has long been in cul- 
tivation as an ornamental plant, and it has distinct 
merits in this capacity; but in the eastern states it has 
never attracted attention for its fruit. 

A blackberry which has been singularly overlooked 
by botanists is one which was described by Bigelow in 
his "Plorula Bostoniensus" as long ago as 1824, as 
Rubus setosus (Figs. 80, 81). This was thought by 
Torrey and Gray, in the "Flora of North America," 
to be a form of Rubus hispidus. A most careful 
study of it has been made by Professor Peck, state 
botanist of New York, w^ho, not recognizing it as 

Fit. 80. RubuM nionu. Half ilu. 

rand's blackberry 363 

Bigelow's plant, described it in 1891 as Biibus Mspidus 
var. suberectus (Fig. 81). It bears a rather small black 
or reddish fruit, ripening in July and August, of about 
the quality of the dewberry fruit. The plant is ascend- 
ing or half erect, the older stems densely clothed with 
slender but stiff slightly bent prickles. The leaflets 
are very strongly toothed, not shining as in Biibus Ms- 
pidus, and also thinner and longer than in that species. 
The plant occurs in New York, Pennsylvania and New 
England. It is not cultivated. (See page 377.) 

A slender and peculiar woods form of the high -bush 
blackberry, which is shown half-size in Fig. 82, is 
found upon Mt. Desert, coast of Maine, westward and 
northward, and which I. once named Bubus villosus var. 
Bandii (see Band and Redfield's "Flora of Mt. Desert 
Island," p. 94, 1894), in compliment to Mr. Edward L. 
Rand, who has been a most energetic explorer of the 
flora of the interesting island where it is found. It 
gives no promise to the cultivator, but the student of 
our native blackberries may like a characterization of 
it, for the variety is probably widely distributed north- 
wards. Its chief botanical marks are these : Low and 
diffuse (1 to 2% feet high), the canes bearing very 
few and weak prickles or often entirely unarmed, very 
slender and soft, sometimes looking as if nearly her- 
baceous ; leaves very thin and nearly or quite smooth 
beneath and on the petioles, the teeth rather coarse 
and unequal ; cluster short, with one or two simple 
leaves in its base, not villous, and very slightly if at 
all pubescent ; flowers half or less the size of those of 
the blackberry ; fruit small, dry and "seedy." Its chief 
characters are its low, weak and practically unarmed 
stems, thin leaves and small flowers. (See page 385.) 


Tho (.'loudben-y, 
Rtihxx Cliunitrmonis, 
an hiTbaeeoiis little 
bramble of the boreal 
paits of the northern 
htmisphere, e 
most excellent frnit, 
which 13 much used 
by residents of the 
countries where it 
grows. It is not in 
cultivation for its 
fruit, but the follow- 
ing aceoiiDt of the berry, by J. M. 
Macoun in "Garden and Forest" for 
1889, is so interesting that I transcribe 
it for the conclusion of this discussion 
of the rubus fniits : 

"The Cloudberry, which is found 
in few localities south of the Canadian 
boundary, and even then not in a great 
abundance, is quite coniraou and greatly 
prized in Xowfoundlaod, Labrador, Xova 


Scotia and northern Quebec. It is known under vari- 
ous names, and is very abundant through northern 
Canada, extending from the Atlantic to the Pacific, and 
north to the Arctic sea. Growing always in peat bogs 
at the south, and further north in open boggy places 
in woods, it is found in the greatest profusion on the 
barrens beyond the northern limit of tree growth, 
occasionally ripening its fruit within the Arctic Circle. 
In spite of the fact that it is very susceptible to frost, 
and that frequently the fruit does not mature at all, it 
seems to improve in quality, like a few other berries, 
toward the northern limits of its distribution. 

^^ Kubus arciicus and E. Chamcpmorus are frequently 
found together, the broad, rose -colored flowers of the 
one contrasting beautifully with the large, white ane- 
mone blossoms of the other. The Cloudberrv resembles 
none of its congeners in color or in flavor. The rich 
amber or golden berries are only slightly tinged with 
deep red on the side toward the sun ; and they never 
have more than the slightest trace of acidity. Indeed, 
so tasteless is the berry that it can hardly be eaten at 
all until ripe. The berries when apparently mature are 
often dry and insipid, tasting not unlike a very young 
apple; indeed, the name * Bake -apple beiry,' by which 
it is known in the maritime provinces, may have been 
given to it on account of the real or supposed resem- 
blance of its flavor to that of a baked apple. 

"When quite ripe, however, the Cloudberry has an 
intensly sweet, honey -like flavor, slightly recalling that 
of the large white raspberry of cultivation ; and then, 
if eaten in small quantities, it is perhaps the most de- 
licious of our northern berries. The habitants of 
Quebec and the Indians prefer it just as it approaches 


ripeness and before it has lost its acid taste ; but to 
southerners it is at that time hardly palatable. 

"It is known in northern Quebec and about Hud- 
sou's Bay as the Yellow-berry, and in that part of 
the country there is no fruit more sought after for 
cooking. A small amount of sugar is needed in pre- 
paring it for the table, and jam made from this berry- 
lias such a rich and delicate flavor, so unlike that made 
from any other fruit, that at several of the Hudson 
Bay Company's posts large quantities are preserved and 
sent to friends at home. The Chipvegan Indians of 
the Mackenzie river valley make a sugar from the 
juice of the birch, in which the Cloudberries are cooked, 
and, prepared in this manner, they are considered a 
great delicacy. Few birds eat the Cloudberry, so that 
when they are not picked by man they decay slowly on 
the vines, and finally drop to the ground." The Cloud- 
berry is often mentioned in the narratives of travelers 
in the arctic. 

The Botanical Names of the Blackberries 

and Deivberries 

The most curious and embarrassing confusion has arisen re- 
specting the names of the American rubi of the blackberry and 
dewberry group. In 1753, LinnaBus described Bubus Ckmademtis, 
In 1789, Aiton described JRubus viUostts. LinnoBUs* species has 
always been taken to be the common dewberry of the North, and 
Alton' s species has been taken to be the common high-bush 
blackberry of the North. The original descriptions indicate that 
the names have not been properly applied by American botanists. 
Consequently, I had drawings made of the original specimens now 
deposited in London, and it became evident at once that the 
species had been misunderstood. I, therefore, laid aside the 
work of revision of the group, and, consequently, the publication 


of this book, until I could personally examine the original speci- 
mens. I have now had the opportunity of examining the speci- 
mens of Linneeiis and Aiton; also those of Willdenow and Link 
at Berlin, and of Michaux at Paris ; and through the courtesy of 
Professor Dr. Beck, I have obtained drawings and full notes of 
the specimens of Trattinnick at Vienna. 

Having now seen the original types of the American black- 
berries and dewberries, I am able to make a new disposition of 
the species. Linnaeus' Ruhns Canadeims is unmistakably the 
thomless blackberry, which was described in 1891 by Britton as 
Ruhus Millspaughii (p. 323). Aiton's Rubus rillosiis is unmistak- 
ably the dewberry of the North, the plant to which we have 
heretofore applied the name Rubus Camidefiftis, His specimens 
are mostly sterile shoots, and are from plants which were grown 
in the Kew gardens. These specimens are shown in the illus- 
tration on page 372. Ordinarily the dewberry is not villous, and 
the name, therefore, is a misnomer; but Aiton made the name 
because the tips of the verdurous shoots of the dewberry contain 
a villous pubescence. These leafy tips of the dewberry are 
rarely seen in herbaria, and it is, therefore, not strange that 
the specimens of Aiton have been misunderstood ; but the 
specimens are nevertheless unmistakably the dewberry. 

While the northern dewberry now has a name (Ruhus viUosus)^ 
the common high -bush blackberry is left nameless. Our next 
resource, therefore, is to look up the supposed synonyms of the 
high -bush blackberry. The Rubus inermis described by Willdenow 
in 1809, and credited by him to North America, is one of these 
synonyms. The specimens in the Berlin herbarium are unmis- 
takably a spineless form of Rubus ulmifoUus of Greece! This 
name is, therefore, disposed of. The next name in order of pub- 
lication is the Rubus argutus of Link, published in 1822. Link's 
specimens in Berlin are well preserved, and are unmistakably the 
form of high-bush blackberry which we have known as Rubus 
frondos'HS. This plant should be regarded as a good species; and 
since Rubus argutus was published two years earlier than fron- 
dosusy that name must stand. Two rubi were described by 
Rafinesque in his "Florula Ludoviciana" in 1817 — Rubus angu- 
latus and Rubus nitidus. Rafinesque left no specimens, and his 
descriptions are so meager that it is utterly impossible to deter- 


mine what plants he meant to designate, and the names must, 
therefore, be dropped. Kenrick uses the name Bubus Americanus 
for the "bush blackberry" in his "New American Orchardist," 
1833; but he probably had no particular form of blackberry in 
mind, and, moreover, the name AmericanuB was earlier used Y*y 
Persoon and by Prince. 

Mubus flageUaris of Willdenow is a puzzle. The specimens 
are in the Berlin herbarium, and are well preserved (Fig. 83). 
Willdenow says that the thing is American, but I have never 
seen an American plant like it, and it seems to me to be one of 
the European dewberries. It is a significant fact that this plant, 
which Willdenow described from cultivated species, is still grow- 
ing in a number of the botanical gardens of Europe under the 
name Ruhus Canadensis, If it is American, it is a most unusual 
form, modified by cultivation; but I suspect that it is only a 
form of a European species, allied to Ruhus cwsius. 

The Ruhus procumbens of Muhlenberg's Catalogue cannot be 
identified. I have not been able to discover that he sent any 
specimens under this name to the European herbaria. 

In 1823, Trattinnick described two species of rubi (Ruhus 
fiaridus. Fig. 91; and Ruhus Ensleniiy Fig. 87). These have been 
doubtfully referred to the dewberry of the North. His Rubus 
flondus is a peculiar and well-marked form of the plant which 
must now be called Rubus argutusy whereas his Rubus Enslenii is 
the plant which Britton has recently named Rubus Baileyanus, 

The Rubus suberectus of Hooker, 1833, collected by Richard- 
son in the Lake Superior region, is in the herbarium at Kew, 
and is the plant which we must now call Rubus arguius. Link. 

Of all the American blackberries and dewberries of which 
types are in the European herbaria, only Michaux's Rubus trimalis 
has been properly understood; and even this species has been 
much confounded with forms of the northern dewberry. 

Having now identified the various type specimens in the 
European herbaria, we are prepared to rename the American 
species. Before doing this, however, it will be necessary to 
clarify our minds in respect to the natural groups or species of 
the plants themselves. While it is to be hoped that the Ameri- 
can rubi will never be the subject of such minute division as 
the European congeners have been, it is nevertheless imperative 


that our TwogaiT^i species should be broken up, if we are to 
clearly understand them. Ot the higb-buah bioekbeir;, there 
are three general types or oateKoriea : (1) The common bigh- 
buah blackberry of the North, which haa larf^e, pointed, TillonB 
leaves and long, open, pubescent racemes. (See Figs. 59, 60.) 
This is the plant whieh is ordinarily taken as tho type o( 


Bubus villostiSf but strangely enough, although the common black- 
berry, it now has no scientific name. I, therefore, propose to call 
it Bubus nigrobaccus (p. 379). (2) The leafy-cluster type of black- 
berry, which is characterized by a stiffer and mostly shorter 
growth, by smaller and usually narrower leaves, short and leafy 
fiower- clusters, and the general, although not complete, absence 
of villousness (Figs. 64, 65, 90). This plant must now receive the 
name Bubus argutus. Link, and its synonyms are Bubus frondosus, 
Bigelow, and Bubus suberectus, Hooker. A very large -flowered, 
short-clustered and blunt-leaved type of this is the plant which 
Trattinnick described as Bubus floriduSf and which I now propose 
to designate as Bubus argutus var. floridus, (3) The thornless 
blackberry type (Figs. 92, 93), which must now be called Bubus 
Canadensis, a synonym of which is Bubus Millspaugkii, 

Another form of the high -bush blackberry is a plant which 
Porter has named Bubus Allegheniensis, or the mountain black- 
berry. I have not had opportunity to examine this plant in its 
native state. The herbarium specimens do not always seem to 
be distinct enough to warrant the separation of the plant from 
the common high-bush blackberry, but since Professor Porter 
has studied the plant in its native state for many years, and 
insists in several publications upon its distinctness, I shall accept 
it as a distinct species (p. 381). I am the more inclined to this 
opinion since if the common high -bush blackberry were to be 
united with the mountain blackberry, Bubus Allegheniensis would 
have to be taken as the type of the species ; and I should consider 
it unfortunate to take a mountain form as the type of a common 
continental plant. This arrangement gives an analytical and 
perspicuous treatment to the high -bush blackberries, and should 
be the means of making the various forms better known. It 
goes without saying that in plants which are so confused as 
rubi, intermediate and perplexing forms will be found; but even 
these forms can be best understood when the plants are broken 
up into their reigning types. 

Coming to the dewberries, we find ourselves in new trouble. 
In the first place, as we have seen, the common dewberry 
of the North must be Bubus villosus and not Bubus Cana- 
denffis. This dewberry includes two or three distinct forms, 
two of which I propose to separate at once as distinct species. 


One of these species I shall now call Eubus invisus (p. 374 ), it 
being the plant which I have formerly described as Bubua Cana- 
densis yar. invisus. There can be no doubt, I think, of the distinct- 
ness of this species from the common dewberry. Of the merits 
of the other species, I am not so well convinced, although from 
a study of material from several sources, I have decided to 
separate it as a species. It is the form which has been described 
by Torrey and Gray as Ruhua villosus var. humifusua (see Fig. 77, 
page 353). This plant has been recognized by Britton as specifi- 
cally distinct, and he has named it Rubus Baileyanus, As before 
said, however, this is the plant which Trattinnick has de- 
scribed as Rubus Ensleniif and this name must stand. There 
are still two or three forms of the common dewberry of the 
North which may need to be separately named, and I suspect 
that in the near future one or two of them will be elevated to 
specific rank. One is the plant which I formerly described as 
var. roribaccuSj and the other is now described by Professor 
Card, from notes in my herbarium, as var. Michiganensis (p. 374). 

The history of Rubus Enslenii brings up an interesting 
question in respect to the variation of the high-bush blackberry. 
Torrey supposed this to be a form of the common blackberry; 
and it has been generally considered by botanists that the high- 
bush blackberry has trailing forms (p. 352). As a matter of fact, 
however, it has not. There are certain hybrids between the dew- 
berry and high -bush blackberry, but they are so distinct in their 
characters as to be easily recognized. It was one of these 
hybrids which Willdenow had when he made the name Ruhis 
heterophyllus. The name was published with no description, 
so that it is not allowed to stand in botanical nomenclature. 

The following running sketch will enable us to understand 
the botanical characters of the East-American blackberries and 
dewbcnrries : 

A. Dewberries : plants trailing, or at most slightly ascending, 
usually rooting by means of tips, 
B. Fruit normally black (sometimes running into white forms) . 
c. Peduncles few- to several -flowered, 

1. Rubus villosus Alton, Hort. Kew. ii. 210 (1789). R, Cana- 
densis, authors, not Linn. Common dewberry (Figs. 74, 84). 
A strong- growing prickly plant, mostly with glabrous stems, 


which sometimes rise a foot or two above the earth and are 
then prostrate ; leaves medium to rather large, firm and thick, 
of three to seven oval or ovate, rather long-pointed and sharply 
doubly -toothed leaflets ; racemes erect, with leaf- like bracts 
and from 1- to 3-flowered, the central flowers opening first ; fruit 
variable, but usually globose or ovoid, with a few large and 
rather loose drupelets, shining black, sour, but becoming sweet 
at full maturity. This is the common dewberry of the northern 
states, growing along the roadsides and on banks, the strong 
stems often reaching a length of five to eight feet. The species 
has a wide range, occurring as far south as Florida, and west 
and southwest to Kansas, Oklahoma and Arizona. In its 
southern ranges, it has been confounded with R. trivialis. It 
is a very variable species, and it is probable that future obser- 
vations may show that it should be broken np into two or three 
specific types. The form which Aiton had (Fig. 84), and which 
is here intended, is the one with large and firm, glabrous leaflets 
and strong growth. Another form has much smaller and ashy 
pubescent leaflets, weak growth, and fewer-flowered peduncles ; 
but I am not able to separate these two forms. So far as I 
have observed them, they seem to be associated with soil and 

The Fig. 84 is made from Aiton 's type of Rubus villosus in 
the Natural History Museum at South Kensington, London. A 
and B are exact copies; C is a leaf from a third and remaining 
sprig. The large specimen is the tip of a verdurous trailing 
shoot. Such shoots have a villous pubescence, although the 
species is normally glabrous. The name Rubus villosus is, there- 
fore, an unfortunate one for the common dewberry (p. 3G7). 

In cultivation, /?. rillosus has given a number of varieties of 
dewberries, among them being the Windom, Geer, Mayes or 
Austin, Lucretia's Sister, and evidently the Maynard. 

Vai^ RORiBACrus.* R. Canadensis var. rm-ihaccns Bailey, Amer. 
Gard. xii. 82 (1891). Lucretia dewberry (Figs. 71, 72, 85). 

A robust form, distinguished by large wedge -obovate, jagged 
leaflets, very long flower-stalks and large flowers (sometimes 

*SiDce it is important, as a matter of nomenclature, to know the date of 
a new name, ic is hereby stated that this book Is actually published October 
26. 1M)R. 


two inches acroas), aod leaf-like eepals. This is represented 
in cultivation by the Lucretia dewbeny, which is a native of 
West Virginia. (See pages 332-335.) I am in donbt as to 
whether this variety actually occnre 
!y^ in the nild state except in the 

form of the orif^inal Lncretia ; that 
is, it may be a mere incidental va- 
riation from a single plant, tjom 
which we have derived a cultivated 
stock, rather than a trne {geograph- 
ical form. It is very well marked in 
, cultivation. It is possible that the 
ation has been brought about 
• by domestication. 

Var. MiCHiOAHBNBiS Card in 
herb. (Fig. 76, p. 351.) 

A robust form, with woody 
stems and comparatively few weak 
recurved prickles, and strong, up- 
right, pubescent flower-shoots, long 
stipules and very large leaflets, 
which are very deeply and irregu- 
. larly ent. This plant has been col- 
lected by myself on the sandy banks 

r Lake Michigan, in southwest Michigan, where it seems to be 

istinctly marked. 

2. BuBUS IKVisrs, B. CatiailcNais var. inmu* Bailey, Amer, 
Gard. xii. 83 (1801). (Fig. 75, 86.) 
A very well-marked dewberry, with somewhat ascending aud 
not very prickly stems, a light-colored foliage, and large, thinnish 
leaflets which are coaraely and simply toothed ; peduneles forking 
into two or three pnrfs ; pedicels long, the flowers large, and 
sepals leaf-like. This plant grows upon banks and along roads 
from New York to Alabama and west to Kansas and Uiasouri. 
The large, simple notches in the leaves, and the long, forking 
flower -clusters readily distinguish this plant from its fellows. 


Bartel, Mammoth, 

CO. Peilancles i 


T S -flowered. 

3. RuBUS EssLENii Tratf., E09. Monogr. iii, 73 (1823). It: ril- 

losus Tar. huiaifasus Ton. & Gray, Fl. N. Am. i. i'>5 

(1S40), not E. humifujiiis Weihe. A. ini'iaus Britton, Bull. 

Torr. Bot. Club, :«. 279 (1893). R. Bailesanas Britton, 

Pterid. & Spermat. N, Am. 185 (1893-4). (Figs. 77, 87.) 

A weak plant, trailing flat upon the ground, the Htema Bomp- 

times almost herbaceous, with a very few weak prickles and thin 

leaflets; flowers solitarf, or sometimes in twos, on short leafy 

shoots ; fniit small and loose, black. Grows in sandy places. 


probably tliroughout the northern states, Al- 
though I know it only from soulhneeteni 
Michigan and eastern New York. The 6p«- 
no ecoDonjie import autre, being too 
weak and eott a grower to promise much 

the caltivator. 


. KvBus TRiviALis Michx. 
Fl. Bor.-Am, 
(1803), SonlhernDew 
berry (Pig. 88). 

Stems tery long, often 
growing ten to fifteen feet, 
mostly thickly beset with 
prickleB and BOmetimea with 
reddish bristles; leavea rather 
short -stalked, and compara- 
tively small, rigid, and ever- 
green or nearly so, the 
petioles and midribs strong 
and prickly, the leaflets vary- 
ing from nearly oblong to 
oblong-ovate ; pedicels mostly 
short and simple, termina- 
ted by B, large and showy 
Sower; fmit variable in size, 
uaiinlly oblong, and more or 
less dry and seedy. This 
Bpeeies is widely distriboted 
from Virginia south and 
southwest. It is a variable 
species, running into some 
,t Vienns. Xone-hHlt. varieties with rather broad 
leaves and very large flow- 
ers. It is possible that two species are confased 
under this nnme, but much of the confusion has 
from the confounding of S. vitloaw) with it. 
The apecimcn upon which Michsux founded the 
species is the form with narrow, hard leaflets md 

> epecieit 


le-thlrd si 



short, BtraiRlit, prickly peduncles. In cnltivatlon, tl 
has givea tbe Mnntilee, Wiiuon White and Bauer. 

In the sontliweet, from Hissoiiri to Texas, there h n curious 
form ot dewberry whith I have at various times intended to make 
the type ot a new species, but which 
may be a Beriea of hybrid forms be- 
tween B. trivialis and R. argulua. It 
has much the ran^ of Tariation of tlie 
well-known hybrid of the northern dew- I 
berry and blackberry, and anlil I have ^ 
opportunity to study the planla In tbe 
field, I should prefer to call It a hybrid. 
It is sometimes trailing, and some- 
times sub-erect. It is variouHly pubes- 
cent, is usually armed, and sometimes 
hiGpid ; the flowers are suniotimes two 
or three, and sometimes in elongated 
clusters ; the leaves are very variable, 
ranging from the narrow forms of e 
almost to the broader forms of B. arguttis, 

BB. Frait red owd small, aair<:fly eatable. 
3. Rl-Bus HispiBtS Linn. Sp. PI. 433 (1753) (Fig. 7a). 

Stems scarcely woody, but lasting over winter, perfectly 
prostrate, and beset with small, reftexed, weak bristles, sending 
up many short and leafy flowering shoots ; leaflets mostly three, 
obovalc, blunt and shining, firm and thick in texture, and 
tending to be evergreen ; flowers small and few on leafless pe- 
duncles ; fruit of few grains, red or purple and sour. Sandy 
places and low woods in the northern states, and sonthward to 
the mountains o( South Carolina. LinuKus' specimen is well 
preserved in his herbarium in London, and is properly nnder- 
stood by American botanists. 

A.\. Blackberries: charaelericeA fiy erect or strict grotcth {Sn. 6 
often an exception), and the plants propagating from 
B. riant weak, hiapiil rather than thomg, the fruit r«d(fuft. 

KuBirs SETOSU8 Bigelow, PI. Host. ed. 2, 198 (1824) (Pigs. 

J strains of R. triviaiis 


lending or almost c 

: low-growing plant. 


BtetUB densely clothed with very slender thoiigli aligbtl^ bent 
prickleB; le&flets nsuallj large, ovate to oblanceolate, point«d, 
scarcely shining, very strongly toothed; fruit reddish black. In 
bogs throughout the northern states and southward to Florida 
and Arkansas. It is distin^ished 
by a light cast of foliage and 
jellowisb prickles. In many cases 
it looks as it it were a hybrid 
between a blackberry and red 
raspberry, and has, in fact, bt^n 
taken for snoh. It has ordi- 
narily, however, been con- 
founded with B. higpidus, with 
which it has little in common. 
The long, slender, and scat- 
tered bristles and diffuse, open 
habit distinguish it from its 
> allies. 

m. Plant rather Iok and stiff, 
eery thomg, the vnder 
surfaces of the leares 
v}iile-pubcs<XHt ; frttit 
7. Rl-bus cuneifouvs Pursh., 
Fl. Am. Sept. 347 (18U) 
(Pigs. 70, 80). 
A stiff and very thorny plant, 
growing from one to three feet 
high ; leaflets obovate, thick, 
iliilt green above and white- 
lomentose below ( petioles armed; 
flower -clusters rather small and 
short, bearing from two to eight flowers, and often leafy 
lielom ; fruit medium size, firm, but sweet and often delicious. 
This species ranges from New Jeraey to Florida. In cultiva- 
tion, it hns given us the Topsy, or Tree, bineklwrry, which is 
character ixed by most vicious thorns. Very strong and verdur- 
ous shoots oE the Sand blackberry bear oblong-ovate leaflets. 


which are distinctly pointed and deeply notched, and which tend 
to lose their pubescence. This fact has led to a misunderstand- 
ing of the species. The garden forms have this character of 
foliage; in fact, the Topsy, when growing yigorously, almost 
loses the white color of the leaves, and there is little external 
appearance to indicate that it belongs to B. cuneifolius. This 
fact led me to question the origin of the Topsy blackberry from 
this species, but a study of the plant in its natural haunts, both in 
the North and the South, has convinced me that it is a direct 
cultivated offshoot of the sand blackberry. 

BBB. Plant diffuse and mostly tall, thorny ^ the leaves and in- 
florescence distinctly glandular -pubescent ; fruit normally 
black (running into whitish forms) . 

8. RuBUS NIGROBACCUS. B. viUosus, authors, not Alton. Common 
High-bush Blackberry, Long-cluster Blackberry (Figs. 
59, 60). 

Distinguished by very tall and usually somewhat recurved 
furrowed stems, strong hooked prickles, three to five large 
ovate or lance -ovate, very distinctly pointed leaflets, which are on 
distinct stalks, the middle one being long- stalked and sometimes 
distinctly heart-shaped; the lower surface of the leaves, as well 
as the framework of the flower- clusters, are hairy and glandular; 
the flower-cluster elongated, with the large and showy flowers 
on pedicels an inch or two long, which stand out at right 
angles to the main axis; fruits rather firm, long, seedy, mostly 
sweet or aromatic. This is the prevailing high-bush blackberry 
of woods and fence rows of the North, and extends as far south 
as the mountains of North Carolina and west to Iowa, Kansas 
and Missouri. It is perfectly represented in Fig. 59. In cultiva- 
tion, it has given the class known as the long-cluster black- 
berries, of which the Taylor and the Ancient Briton are examples. 
The reason for the giving of a new name to the common black- 
berry is explained on pages 366 to 368. 

Var. SATivus. B, villosus var. sativus Bailey, Am. Gard. 
xi. 719 (1890). Short-cluster Blackberry (Figs. 61, 62, 63). 

Usually somewhat lower in growth, the leaflets mostly broader 
and less distinctly long-pointed, and the flower clusters distinctly 


most perfectly developed berries from the Wilson 
Early plant, whk-h grew in same hill with the Dor- 
chester, planted the seed first in frreenhonse, and when 
large enough to transplant in open field were set in 
single hills fonr feet apart in nursery n>w, and allowed 
to remain there with good eultnre and pmning for 
four years, until the true eharat*ter of each was de- 
veloped, and one proved to l)e superior to all the 
others, producing an abundance of fruit, larger and 
earlif-r than its parent, the Wilson Early. That one 
best plant was called Wilson Junior, and preserved 
for propagation. All the rest of that family of plants 
were destroyed. The Wilson Junior has been carefully 
propagated, and as fast as the young canes became old 
enough to bear fruit, have been very satisfactory, and 
last year (18^) one acre yielded 110^< bushels of fruit 
by side of five acres of Wilson Early in same field, 
with similar culture, which averaged but 53 bushels, 
and the whole crop of blackberries in the county of 
Burlington, N. J., is reported at 47 bushels per acre. 
The fruit was large, early and very fine, and sold better 
in market than any other sent from the Pomona Nur- 
series, selected berries measuring 4% inches around 
lengthwise by 3% inches crosswise. Many visitors 
called to see them, and all, so far as we know, thought 
well of them. * * * * 

"In 1877 we again repeated the same experiment, 
by selecting the largest and most perfect berries from 
the Wilson Early, grown by side of the Dorchester, 
planted them separately, grew them four years, then 
selected the best which is called Eureka, and all the 
rest of that family were destroyed. Of the Eureka 
we have propagated several thousand plants. Thej' 

u r iL -■ • — ^ f 

•:#^L '..-- 

Tit*- 1:--- 
-it »^ " :•,- 

are IK*., -i^ ,^. 


shorter, fruits rounded and looser, with lar^r drupelets. This 
Is the nondescript blackberry of open fields, and is the pfti«nt 
of the larger part of the short-clUBter or garden blackberries, of 
which the Snyder and the Kittatinny are the leading examples. 


Var. ALBlKt^G. S, villoSHS var. albintis Bailey, Am. Qard 
xi. 720 (IBSO). While Blackberry. 

Ad occasional form churacteriiied by a light green or olive 
color of the bark aud a mb«r -colored fmitg. It is probably an 
albinouB form of the blackberry, but the plants which I have seen 


growing wild have the long clusters of E. nigrobaccus rather than 
the short ones of the var. sativus. 

The race of hybrids between the blackberry and dewberry 
{B. nigrobaccus X -B* villosus) has already been mentioned (Figs. 
66-69) . These hybrids are frequent in many parts of the northern 
states, and are usually readily distinguished from either the 
blackberry or the dewberry by the half-erect habit, the broad and 
jagged leaflets, the forking, small flower- clusters, and the small, 
loose -grained fruits. In gardens,, offsprings of this cross are the 
Wilson, Wilson Jr., and Bathbun. These berries are valuable 
for certain purposes, but ordinarily demand special care and treat- 
ment, and are, therefore, not adapted to wide ranges of conditions. 

9. RuBUS Allegheniensis Porter, Bull. Torr. Bot. Club, xxiii. 

153 (1896). R, villosus var. montanus Porter, I.e. xvii. 
15 (1890). R. montanus Porter, 1. c. zzi. 120 (1894) not 
Wirtg. Mountain BlaokbeiTy. 

Plant smaller than the preceding species, and rather more 
slender and less prickly; the branches and leaf -stalks commonly 
reddish, and all the recent parts very prominently glandular; 
leaves much as in R, nigrobaccus^ with small teeth and distinctly 
long-pointed, prominently pubescent below; fruii; small, long and 
narrow, tapering towards the top ; drupelets numerous and small, 
forming a dry fruit with spicy flavor. This species occurs on 
mountains from New York to North Carolina. In its typical 
forms, it is very well marked, and seems to be worthy specific 
rank; but in intermediate stations, it seems to grade into the 
species (p. 370). It has given no horticultural forms. 

BBBB. Plant diffuse or strict, mostly tall, (homy or unarmedj 
with no (or very little) glandular pubescence; fruits black. 

10. BuBUS ARQUTUS Link, Enum. Hort. Berol. ii. 60 (1822). 

R. frondosus Bigel., Fl. Bost. ed. 2, 199 (1824). R. villosus 
var. frondosus Torr., Fl. U. S. i. 487 (1824). JB. suberectus 
Hook., Fl. Bor.-Am. i. 179 (1833). Leafy-cluster Black- 
berry (Figs. 64, 65, 90). 

A plant of comparatively stiff and straight growth, usually 
distinctly dwarfer than R. nigrobaccus, with shorter pointed, often 
narrower and usually more rigid leaflets; stems strong and 

prickly, and tUe whole plant glabrous or only slightly Tiiloust 
except in some of the very young parta or rarely in the fio 
reseence; flower -elnaters short and leafy. Ot wider range than 
S. Bigrohaccas, extending from Lake Superior and New Brunswick 
to Florida, Kansaa, Oklahoma and Mississippi. It is less common 


FlI. 93. 

in tlio North than R. nigrobacrun, but in the South takes the plaoe 
of that Bpecies. From the CarollniLa southward, the plant seems to 
have a habit HOmewhat different from the northern plant, and 
It maj be that the eouthem type is worthy of speeiflc rank. The 


plant is apparently common in Illinois and southward in the 
Mississippi region. The canes usually lack the recurved and 
willowy habit of B, nigrohaccuSy and the absence of the villous 
pubescence is marked. The leaflets are often canescent below, 
and usually a little more coarsely toothed than in B, nigrobaceus. 
In enltivation, the plant has given us Early Harvest, Brunton 
Earl V, Earliest of All, and perhaps Bangor ; and the plant which 
is cultivated as the Dorchester belongs to this species, but I do 
not know if it is the plant which was originally introduced 
under that name. 

Var. FLORIDUS. B. floridus Tratt. Ros. Monogr. iii.73 (1823). 

A form with very short and large- flowered clusters, the floral 
leaves wedge -obovate and rounded at the top. Trattinnick says 
that Enslen collected this in North America. What its range may 
be I do not know. I have seen specimens only from Alabama and 
Mississippi. It has given no cultivated varieties, so far as I 
know. (Fig. 91.) 

Var. Randii. B, villosus var. Bandii Bailey, Rand & Red- 
field, Fl. Mt. Desert, 94 (1894.) (Fig. 82.) 

Low and diffuse, 1°-2X° big^» the canes bearing very few and 
weak prickles, or often entirely unarmed, very slender and soft, 
sometimes appearing as if nearly herbaceous ; leaves very thin, 
and nearly or quit« smooth beneath and on the petioles, the teeth 
rather coarse and unequal ; cluster stout, with one or two simple 
leaves in its base, not villous, and very slightly, if at all, pu- 
bescent; flowers half or less the size of those of B, nigrobaceus ; 
fruit small, dry and seedy. Woods, Mt. Desert, Maine, New 
Brunswick, and Keweenaw peninsula. Lake Superior. 

11. RuBUS Canadensis Linn, Sp. PI. 494 (1753). B, Millspaughii 
Britton, Bull. Torr. Bot. Club xviii. 366 (1891). Thorn- 
less Blackberry. (Figs. 92, 93.) See pp. 322, 367. 

This plant has the general habit of B, nigrobaceus, but is dis- 
tinguished by its long and slender petioles, mostly narrow and 
long acuminate leaves, long stipules, and especially by its lack of 
pubescence and the general absence of thorns. It is apparently a 
well-marked species, growing throughout the country in the 
higher elevations from North Carolina northward. 




Although we have now discussed those groups of 
native fruits in which the greatest progress has been 
made, there still remain several types of considerable 
importance; and one of these, — the gooseberries, — is in 
interest second only to the raspberries and blackberries, 
among improved native berries. In all these groups, 
however, the history has been less eventful than in 
those already discussed ; and since it is our primary 
purpose to record only what has been done and not 
what may be done, these remaining plants may be 
given brief running sketches at a single sitting. 

In reveiwing these various plants, one is tempted to 
call attention again to the great native pomological 
wealth of North America. The species which are con- 
sidered in this book are but a small fraction of the 
whole number of promising indigenous species. An- 
other century will see types of fruits of which we 
know little or nothing, but it is impossible to prophesy 
from what native sources these types will spring. We 
have seen how this wealth of native fruits impressed 
the explorers and colonists. We could glean abundant 
references to this native wealth from the early records. 
Thus, William Wood, in 1634, speaks of the berries in 
the wilds of Massachusetts Bay, as follows: "There 
is likewise Strawberries in abundance, verie large ones, 
some being two inches about ; one may gather halfe a 



bushell in a forenoone : In other seasons there bee 
Gooseberries, Bilberries, Resberries, Treackleberries, 
Hurtleberries, Currants ; which being dryed in the 
sunne are little inferiour to those that our Grocers 
sell in England." 

But even the high north has its treasures of native 
fruit. In fact, it is one of the marvels of traveler 
that berries are so plentiful and so good in those regions. 
Even under the snow they preserve their character, 
and are an indispensable succor when the snow disap- 
pears in the spring. It is literally true that in many 
parts of the cold north, beyond the bounds of civili- 
zation, fruits are in plentiful supply the year round. 

A recent note in "Outing" speaks as follows of the 
native fruits of Labrador: "In spite of latitude and 
Arctic current, Labrador is the home of much that is 
delicious in the berry world, Three varieties of blue- 
berries, huckleberries, wild red currants, having a pun- 
gent, aromatic flav^or, unequaled by the cultivated 
varieties, marshberries, raspberries, tiny white capillaire 
tea-berries, with a flavor like some rare perfume, and 
having just a faint suggestion of wintergreen ; squash- 
berries, pear-berries and curlew-berries, the latter not 
so grateful as the others, but a prime favorite with 
the Esquimaux, who prefer it to almost any other: 
and lastly, the typical Labrador fruit, which, excepting 
a few scattering plants in Canada and Newfoundland, 
is found nowhere outside of the peninsula — the gor- 
geous bake-apple \_Ruhus Cham(emortis] . These cover 
the entire coast, from the St. Lawrence to Ungava. 
Their beautiful geranium -like leaves struggle with the 
reindeer moss upon the islands, carpet alike the low 
valleys and the highest hilltops, and even peep from 


banks of everlasting snow. Only one berry g^rows 
upon each plant, but this one makes a most delicious 
mouthful. It is the size and form of a large dewberry, 
but the color is a bright crimson, half-ripe, and a 
golden yellow at maturity. Its taste is sweetly acid, it 
is exceedingly juicy, and so delicate that it mig^ht be 
thought impossible to preserve it." 

In a recent report to Congress on the agrieultiiral 
possibilities of Alaska,* Walter H. Evans writes as 
follows of the wild fruits : ^* Alaska is preeminently a 
land of small fruits and berries. But little attention 
has been given to their cultivation. What few attempts 
have been made seem to pi-omise well. Hardly any 
berries are cultivated except strawberries, currants and 
raspberries. Of these, both wild and cultivated forms 
were seen growing, and the adaptability of the wild 
plants to domestication was very evident. The wild 
strawberry was seen under cultivation at Wrangell, and 
specimens of Rubus stellatus, known as dewberry, 
^morong,' and 'knesheneka,' are growing in a garden 
at Sitka with apparently considerable success, and it 
seems probable that more could be done in this line. 
The flavor of most of the Alaskan berries was found to 
be excellent, and some of them might be worthy of 
introduction into portions of the stat-es. 

"Of the berries which have the widest distribution, 
may be mentioned the salmon berries (Rutus spectaM- 
lis) ; two kinds of cranberries, the high -bush ( Vibtir- 
nam pauciflorum) and the small cranberry (Vaecinitim 
ViiiS'Idcea)) red and black currants (Rihes rubrum 
and R, laxiflorum)\ crowberries (Empetrum nigrum) \ 
huckleberries ( Vaccinium ulighwsum and its variety, 

•Bull. 48, Office of Exp. Stations, Dept. of A«rlc. 


mucranatum); blueberries {Vaccinium parviflorum and 
F. ovali/olium); bunchberries (Comus Canadensis and 
CSuecica); rBs^herries {Bubus strigosus)] elderberries 
(Sambucus racemosa); and the ^molka' berry (Rubns 
OhamcBfnorus) . Of less general distribution are straw- 
berries (Fragaria Chiloensis), dewberries (Rubus stel- 
latus), thimbleberries {R. parviflortis), salal berries 
{Oaultheria Shallofi), bog cranberries {Vaccinium 
Oxycoccus), wine or bear berries (Arctostaphylos 
alpina), etc. 

" Many of these berries are utilized in various ways 
by the native and white population. In addition to the 
consumption of fresh berries, there are considerable 
quantities stored up in various ways for winter use. 
The white population can, preserve, and make jelly of 
the different kinds, while among the natives the prin- 
cipal method of preserving them is in the almost uni- 
versal seal oil, a vessel filled with berries preserved in 
this way forming with many of the natives a ' potlatch ' 
by no means to be despised. Some of the berries are 
utilized to a considerable extent in making wine, the 
wineberry of Kadiak being largely used in that way." 

The Oooseberry 

Of native gooseberries there are many kinds, inhab- 
iting almost every part of our great territory.* The 
gooseberry of historj' is a native of the Old World, and 
in some parts of Europe, particularly in England, it is 
very popular, and has reached a high degree of perfec- 
tion. This European gooseberry was early brought to 

*De8cription8 of all these species, with pictares of many of them, are to be 
found in Card's "Bush-Fruits." 


this country, but its success is vicarious at the best, 
owing to the attacks of a native fungus or mildew. 
Wild berries, therefore, were forced upon the attention 
of experimenters. Kenrick (1833), who is always 
strong on the native fruits, mentions no named varie- 
ties of American origin, even in the eighth edition of 
his "New American Orchardist," 1848; but he speaks 
of a report of excellent wild gooseberries growing in 
the valley of the Columbia river. Goodrich, however, 
remarks in his "Northern Fruit -Culturist" (Burlington, 
Vt.), 1849, that "we have it from good authority that 
native sorts have been discovered both in New Hamp- 
shire and Vermont, well adapted to garden culture." 

Apparently the first native gooseberry to receive a 
name was one originated by Abel Houghton, of Lynn, 
Mass., and which now bears his name- How Hough- 
ton came by this gooseberry seems not to be known. 
The earliest record I know of it is in 1847, when it 
was shown before the Massachusetts Horticultural 
Society. The entry in Manning's history of the 
society is the following: "The Houghton's Seedling 
gooseberry, the first of those native varieties which 
have proved so valuable for their exemption from mil- 
dew, was exhibited by Josiah Lovett on the 7th of 
August." In DoAvuing's "Horticulturist" for 1848,* 
appears the first full description : 

"Houghton's Gooseberry.— I have been expecting 
a private opportunity to forward you, ere this, a box 
of gooseberries, of the best variety I have ever seen. 
It is so desirable a sort, that I could not well refrain 
from forwarding a sample, as I now do, by express. 

♦Vol. ii. 242. 


I regret that the specimens are only the gleanings of 
four bushes, my whole stock of this kind. This 
gooseberry is a seedling, called here Houghton's. It, 
I have no doubt, was raised from seed from our 
native gooseberry. Its leaf, as you will perceive by 
tlie enclosed shoot, bears evidence of this origin. 
This is the only gooseberry cultivated that does not 
mildew under any circumstances. The cultivators in 
Lynn, Mass., where this fruit originated, have grown 
it for three or four years, and their testimony accords 
with my assertion. The growth is exceedingly thrifty, 
making long pendent shoots, similar to an English 
variety called 'Crown Bob.' I have nineteen table 
varieties, received four years since from Cunningham 
& Sons, Liverpool, and for my taste, Houghton's Seed- 
ling surpasses them all, notwithstanding the fruit is 
not so large as the European varieties. Most of the 
fruits I now send you, were taken from shoots grown 
within one inch of the soil. I have picked at least 
ten quarts of fruit from four bushes, which were 
layers two years since. I think that the Houghton's 
Seedling will supplant almost every foreign variety 
from our soil. The long shoots which spring from 
the bottom of the stock often take root themselves. 
It will be a fine variety for training, as it makes long 
shoots, and fruits prodigiously, even to the extreme 
end of the previous year's growth. 

"Yours very truly, in haste, 

"John M. Ives. 

"Salem, August 15, 1847." 

"(If this is a seedling from an indigenous goose- 
berry, as it appears to be, and one which, being 
entirely adapted to our climate, never mildews, it 


deserves attention. We regret the berriea were heated 
before they reaehed ns, so that we could not judge of 
their flavor.— Ed.)" 

The Honghton is again mentioned in the "Horti- 
cnltarist" in vol. iii. page 119, and in the volume for 
1854, page 104. Cole has it in his "Amerioan Fruit 
Book" in 1849, using an illustration from the "Horti- 

>r R. BxtaaatthaU*!. 

cnlturist." Thomas inserted it, but no other native 
gooseberry, in the fourth edition of "American Pniit 
Culturist," 1850. Downing first mentions it in "Fruits 
and Fruit Trees" in the revision of 1860, and Barp>' 
described it iu "Fruit Garden" the same year. 

Hoping to gain some knowledge of Houghton, I 
applied to Walter B. Allen, president of the Houghton 
Horticultural Society of Lynu, who replies as follows, 
under dat« of March, 1896: "The Houghton goose- 
berry was first produced, some sixty years ago, by 
one Abel Houghton of this city (then town) of Lynn. 
Mr. Houghton, we are told, took great interest in hor- 


ticultnre, and many are dow living who recollect bis 
beautiful flower garden, almost the ouly one of note 
in Lynn in those early days. Mr. Houghton was not a 
native of Lynn, as we understand It, and there are no 
descendants of his that we know of. He was called 
Abel Houghton, Jr., so we infer that his father's 
name was Abel. Mr. Houghton died many years ago, 
but when our society was organized, about twenty 
years ago, many of the chief promoters of the move- 
ment, recalling the lovely flower garden of Abel 
Hongbton, Jr., decided to pass bis name down by 
having it placed in Article I. of our Constitution." 

The second development in the evolution of Amer- 
ican gooseberries was the production of a seedling 
of the Houghton by Downing, at Newburgh, N. Y. 
The earliest account of it I know is by "Rasticua," in 
the "Horticulturist" for 1853,* as 
follows: "Downing's Seedling Goose- 
berry, the largest yet known, being ' 
about twice the size of Houghton's 
Seedling, its parent. Pale or light 
green, without any hi nsh, and smooth. 
The skin is verj- thin, and the fruit 
as delicate and tender as any European 4 
gooseberry in its native soil. The 
flavor and aroma are perfect; sweet, 
with plenty of vinous subacid. The *ib »«. cmwn Bob, 
first describer says: 'I experienced " "^1^.'"™' 
the same satisfaction as I did in tast- 
ing the Delaware and Rebecca grapes. It comes up to the 
best English varieties in our very different climate.' " 

This berry, now known as the Downing, is the 

•Vol. vili. 313. 


standard of excellence in American gooseberries, and 
is probably grown more extensively than all other 
varieties combined ; and yet it is only two removes 
from the wild species. 

A third native gooseberry was described in" the 
"Horticulturist," in I860,* as the Monntain Seedling. 
This variety was the subject of an editorial note in 
"Gardener's Monthly," for February, 1863,t at which 

place an inaccurate figure is also given. This variety 
is little grown at present, but it is interesting as being 
the only domestic named variety of another species. 

What, now, are these species of gooseberries? The 
English type is Ribes Qronsiilarin, characterized by a 
low, stiff habit, firm and thickish leaves with revolute 
margins (Fig. 94), a downy ovary, and more or less 
pubescent or bristly fruit (Fig. 96). The Houghton is 
a form of the native Bibes oxyacanlhoides, a species of 

from the vlld apecles. Matnnil site. 


more slender, graceful habit than the other, thinner 
and plane-edged leaves (Fig. 95), and smooth ovary 
and fruit (Pigs. 97-99). This wild gooseberry is na- 
tive in swales and low woods in the northern states, 
and westward to Colorado. Pale Red, a variety which is 
popular in many places, is also Ribes oxy<icanthaid€s ; 
and so, too, I am convinced, is the Downing. Beach* has 
recently suggested that the Downing is a hybrid of 
Ribes ozyacanthoides and R, Orossularia, giving, among 
other reasons for such belief, the fact that its seedlings 
vary towards both species. But even if the two species 
were distinct enough to allow young plants to be re- 
ferred definitely to one or the other, I should still doubt 
the hybrid origin of the Downing. The evolution of 
these gooseberries is graphically shown in Pigs. 97 to 99. 

The commonest wild gooseberry east of the Plains 
is the spiny -fruited, thick-skinned and long -clustered 
species, Ribes Cynosbati, Fig. 100. It is to this species 
that the Mountain belongs (page 394) . Beach considers 
this variety to be a hybrid between Ribes Cynosbati 
and the European gooseberry. Although the fruit 
of Ribes Cynosbati is normally hairy or spiny, smooth- 
fruited forms often occur. Several persons have made 
promising efforts to ameliorate the species. t 

Judged by European standards, the American goose- 
berry is yet far short of perfection. The English 
gooseberry fanciers have kept records of the heaviest 
berries at the shows for two generations, much as a 
horse fancier keeps records of fast stock. The fol- 
lowing records from the "Gooseberry Growers' Reg- 
ister" for 1880 may interest the reader: 

•Bull. 114, N. Y. State Exp. Sta. 

tSee, for example, B. A. Mathews, in Rept. Towa Hort. Soc. 1893. 



Heaviest Qooseberrt Grown Each Year from 1809 to 1880 




dwts. 0^9' 

18 22X 





iuft». or: 

36 16 


Crown Bob 








Crown Bob 






1812 Seed 

. Overall 








Crown Bob 
















Crown Bob 























Yaxley Hero 








Top Sawyer 























Rou^h Robin 

I 26 







































































1867 Seed 

. Rover 



1832 Seed 

. Bumper 



































































































The extent to which the American gooseberries 
have enpplanted the English types in this couDtry 
may he gleaned from the fact that in 1830 a mention 
is made of s display of gooseberries before the Massa- 

Fig. 100. wild Kibtt Caneibati. Nwrlr full 

chusetts Hortipulhiral Society, in -which "several fine 
specimens of English varieties were shown, the pre- 
mium being awarded to Nathaniel Seaver for the 
Jolly Angler, the largest of which measured foar and 
a quarter inches in cirenmference;" whereas, in 1872, 


it is recorded that " the prizes for gooseberries were 
awarded to the Downing, Smith's Improved, and 
Houghton's Seedling, in the order named. No foreign 
goosebeiTies were shown." 

In recent years, however, the English gooseberries 
and their American seedlings have come into new 
prominence, because fungicides have been devised 
which keep the mildew in check ; yet the Downing 
is still the standard variety in America, and it gives 
ever}' promise of holding that position until it is 
supplanted by other varieties coming from American 
species or from hybrids with the European species. 

Native Currants 

Of many species of wild currants in North America, 
only three seem to have given varieties cultivated for 
fruit, and of these none are important. The common 
red and white currants are offspring of Bibes ntbrum 
of the Old World ; and the common black currants 
are Bibes nigrum , also of the Old World. The former 
species, Bibes rubrum, or a plant verj' closely like it, 
is native in cold swamps along the northern borders 
of the United States and northwards ; and if the 
plant had not already been improved from the Euro- 
pean stock, this native plant might have been pressed 
into service before this. Fig. 101 is an excellent 
illustration of this wild currant (on the left), as com- 
pared with the Victoria, a common variety in gardens. 
This wild currant usually bears its fruits near the top 
of the cane, whereas the garden currants are dis- 
tributed over the greater length of the cane. 

The three native currants of which cultivated fruit- 

Fit. tl>l. Wild camiiit Bud tbg enltlWad TIetari*. Nitiin: 


varieties are known are Ribes aureum, B. Americamtm 
(or R.ftoridum), B. sanguineHm. 

Of these varieties, only the Crandall is generally 
known, and even this has little commercial or even 
domestic value. This is 
Bibes aureum, the spei-ii's 
generally known as the liuf- 
(alo or Missouri curniut. 
There are a few otliff 
named fruit -bearing varie- 
ties of this species, 
but they are mostly 
fonflned to the dry 
regions of the West. 
The species has also 
lieeii loug cultivated 
as the flowering cur- 
rant (Fig. 102). It 
grows wild from Mis si i mi 
and Arkansas westward. 

The Crandall cnrrant was 
named for R. W. Cniu- 
dall, of Newton, Kanwaw. 
who fonnd it growing wilil. 
It was introduced in the fi«. ioi. Fiowen of bntnio 
spring of 1888, by Prank "^ ^"ir,^,°t^"''"'"" 

Ford & Son, Ravenna, Ohio.* 

This type or species of currant undonbtedly has 
great promise as the parent of a new and valuable 
race of small fruit. The Crandall, however, is too 
variable to be reliable. Comparatively few plants pro- 


duee abundantly of large fruits, while many of them 
bear fruits little larger than occasional plants of the 
common flowering currant, to which species the Cran- 
dall belongs. When the crop of 1892, at Cornell, was 
at its height, I made a record of the size of fruit upon 
each plant, classifying it into three categories — poor, 
fairly good, and good. The poor fruit was such as 
appeared to be little larger than the fruit of the flow- 
ering currant, or such as is shown — five-eighths nat- 
ural size — in the lower spray in Fig. 103. The good 
fruit is represented in the upper spray in the engraving, 
and it ran from five -eighths to three -fourths inch in 
diameter. The fairly good fruits were those of in- 
termediate size. 

Onlj' a dozen plants out of fifty, or less than a 
fourth of the whole number, could be called pi-ofitable. 
There is every reason to expect that if cuttings were 
taken from good plants alone, the Crandall currant 
would soon rise in popular estimation. At its best, 
the Crandall has decided merits. The fruits are large 
and handsome, firm, of good culinary quality, and the 
plant is thrifty, hardy and productive. The fmite are 
borne in very short and open clusters, to be sure, bat 
they are not picked by the cluster, like the red and 
white curi'auts, but singly, like the gooseberries. To 
some people the flavor of the fruit is disagreeable, and 
it has been said to have a medicinal flavor; but there 
are others — the writer included — who are fond of them, 
even to eat from the hand. In pies and jellies we 
have found them to be useful. It is not to be ex- 
pected, of course, that these fruits will find a ready 
market, because consumers are pot acquainted with 
them ; but if the stock were more uniform, I think 


thilt the (.'randall could be recoiu mended an a good 
fruit for home consumption. Since thei-e are undoubt- 
edly possiliiUtiee before this tj-pe of currant, the 
introduction of the Crandnll has been fortnnnte. The 

plriiit ffrows rciiilily from sfPiJs, nrirl there shnnl'l ho 

iHi difficulty in mpidly securing new varieties ; but 
the seeds slioidd )>e carefully selected. 

In the drj- Plains regions, the Missouri currant 
type has greater promise, not only becanse it thrives 
there, but becBose common cnrrants do not ; but the 
varieties will need to be much improved by carefnl 
Bcleotif>n . 


The Juneberry 

The juneberry grows in many forms over a wide 
range of North America, particularly in the northern. 
parts, and several varieties have been brought into 
cultivation from the wild. All these varieties belong 
to dwarf species. They closely resemble large huckle- 

Only one of these juneberries has gained popu- 
larity. This is the Success (Fig. 104), the history of 
which, by H. E. Van Deman, the introducer, is thus 
told in Annals of Horticulture for 1891: "In Decem- 
ber, 1873, I was traveling on horseback from ray home 
in Kansas to the annual meeting of the State Horti- 
cultural Society, and learned by accident of the where- 
abouts of a fruit, growing in a man's garden, that was 
called huckleberry. On my way home I hunted up 
the place, and found the bushes. I was told that this 
so-called huckleberry bore abundantly everj' year, 
and that it had been brought from Illinois to that 
neighborhood. I afterwards learned that an old man 
had brought seeds of the dwarf juneberry from the 
mountains of Pennsylvania to Illinois, and from them 
grew. this variety. When he and his children went to 
Kansas, about 1868, they took along a stock of the 
plants, and part of them were set at the place where 
I found them. I had no trouble in securing a few of 
the plants, which I immediately took home and set 
out, and the next year, when the bloom appeared on 
them, I learned by consulting the botany that it was 
Amelanchier. The plants grew so well that I went 
back the next year and got several hundred more, and 
planted them at my home. All of them grew, and I 


goou had u \arge plantation. About tLU time I found 
other varieties of the dwarf juneberry ia eultivatioii 
in different parts of Kansas, and got plants which 
bore, and on comparing the fmit with the one 1 first 


got, I thought the first one the best ; and as some 
people duseonraged the cultivation of some of the 
varietieB because of their rather inferior fruit, I named 
my variety * Success.' About 1878 I began to sell the 
plants nnder Hie name Success, and until I sold the 
larger part of my stock, some three years ago, to 
J. T. Lovett, of New Jersey, I had sold more than 
ten thousand plants of this variety." 

This variety Success is of the species Amelanchier 
Botryapium of DeCandoUe (1825), also known as 
A, ohiongifolia of Roemer (1847). The natural dis- 
tribution of the species is from New Brunswick to 
Missouri, although, like the sand cherry and Ameri- 
cana plum, it appears to give its best fruits in its 
western ranges. The western dwarf juneberry (A. al- 
ni folia), which extends eastward as far as Lake Supe- 
rior, has also given rise to varieties which have been 
named and sparingly introduced to cultivation. The 
fruits of the Success juneberry are attractive and 
toothsome, and the plants are exceedingly hardy and 
productive. Did not the birds appreciate the merits 
of the fruits, they might soon become popular in 

The Buffalo -berry 

The buffalo -berry of the Plains (Shepherdia ar- 
gent ea) has long been known as bearing profusely of 
excellent and variable acid berries. It was not intro- 
duced to the horticultural trades as a fruit -bearing 
plant, however, until the fall of 1890, when G. J. and 
L. E. R. Lambrigger, of Big Horn City, Wyoming, 
offered plants to the general market. Since that time 
much has been written, in a fragmentary way, on the 


bufEalo- berry, particularly in the West. It is probable 
that it will never become popular in the East, where 
the currant, gooseberry, and other acid small fruits 
thrive. A Dakotan writes as follows: "Deer, ante- 
lope and elk live on buffalo -berries through the winter, 
but the fruit is excellent for human beings. I do not 
understand why farmers in the Dakotas and Minnesota 
do not grow more of these berries. A tree is of more 
benefit than an apple tree, and is a sure grower. The 
time will come when people will say: *Why did we 
not sooner know about the buffalo -berry?' The trees 
make good hedges, and live when all other vegetation 
dies." Although introduced to cultivation, the buffalo- 
berry has not yet given any distinct named varieties. 
The buffalo -berry is dioecious — that is, the sexes 
are on different plants. This means that the two 
sexes should be known and be planted close together 
to insure fruitfulness. Yet, the writer has a pistillate 
bush of buffalo -berry which is two hundred feet 
from a staminate plant, with a large building 
between the two, and it bears well. Professor Corbett 
makes the following remarks on the sex characters of 
the buffalo -berry:* 

With the introduction of new fruits come new difficulties 
to be overcome by both propagator and cultivator. In the brief 
history of the buflfalo-berry we find no exception to the rule, 
but, on the contrary, added natural causes, which augment these 
difficulties. The dioecious nature of the plant is not known to 
the majority of cultivators, and, what is the more important, 
the dealers furnishing them the stock are equally as ignorant. 
I know of no dealer in nursery stock in the Northwest, even if 
he is familiar with the fact that they are dioecious, who claims 

^American Gurdening, xvi. 45 (Feb. 9, 1805). The pictures (Figs. 105, 106) 
ore my own. 


to be able to diatinguiBli between the two sexea, except at the 
fruiting BeHGon. It is not nnuBual to find persona with a stock 
of the ;oung plaiils upon the mnrket who are not aware that 
there are sterile and fertile plants, and that either is worthless 
without the other. O11I7 last Hpring a caHe of UiIn kind oame 

under ni/ oliservndon. I do not exogRerate the true coudilion 
of HtTairs when I make the Btiit«ment that 90 per cent of 
all tlie bufFnIo-berry stnek pineed upon the marltet ia gathered 
from tlie native thieketn, regtirdleSB of He\, bj just sneh men. 

Suth being the caae, what is to be expected in return T 
Surely nothing more thnn we have — denunciation hy the nofor- 


tunate who have dntwo blanks, and prai§e Irom the prize win- 
n«ni. This coudition of afTairs should not exist, for with but 
litlle care and time the plants eould be marked at blooming 
seaBon or while in fruit, and in this way the two aeiee separated 
and both obtained, This would, however, neoeBsitate two visits 
to the native source of supply durinj; the season, aud thus add 
ninterially to the cost of obtaining n stock of the plants, 

There is, however,, another and easier way of distinguishing 
the staminate irom the pistillate plants— i. e., by bud characters 
while in a dormant condition. With care and experience one 
can readily separate the two. The accompanying illustrations, 
taken from typical specimens of the two forms, may serve as a 
basis for the distinction. 
FiK. 1U.-I is rmm a l^isli 
plant, und in general 

ii li'.sB densely I'lothed 
ih buds. The buds nri.- 
liiiigtHl in smaller and 

the buds themselves are more slender, longer in proportion to 
their diameter than ore the buds on Fig. 106, which is from a 
staminate plant. Upon this the dense groups or clusters of the 
roand-euded buds will be noticed. A study of the planla in the 
field will enable one to readily distinguish between them. 

By observing these simple, yet apparent, characteristics in 


the packing -house or in the field at planting time, all the objec- 
tions urged against the unproductiveness of the buffalo -berry- 
under cultivation would be overcome. It is a plant worthy 
of attention for its ornamental nature, and yet more for its 
valuable jelly -producing fruits. At present we have it only in 
its native state, unimproved by cultivation, yet we find a red 
and a yellow -fruited variety well enough marked in this one 
character to deserve the title of a botanical variety. Nature 
has here begun what the horticulturist only needs to assist, 
— variation. 

The Elderberry 

The common elderberry is almost certain to become 
the parent of a race of domestic fruit-bearing plants. 
Something has already been done towards its improve- 
ment, by introducing good variations from the wild. 
Professor Budd writes as follows in "Rural Life," 
March 15, 1894: "An Improved Elderberry.— When 
R. P. Speer was director of the Iowa Experiment 
Station he planted out an improved variety of the 
elderberry found near Cedar Falls. When loaded 
with fruit last summer, a visitor from Sioux county 
remarked, in passing the bushes : 

" *I never saw such sized berries and clusters of 
elderberry. Where did it come from ? Why don't you 
send it out y On the northern prairies it will be valu- 
able for pie making ! * 

"This variety really shows that the elderberry is 
capable of improvement by selection. It differs in 
leaf, habit, capacity for annual loading with fruit, and 
in the size of the berries and bunches. Last summer, 
too, we came to the conclusion that it made better 
pies than the common sort. To those who make fun 
of the idea of eating elderberry pie, I will merely say: 

'Try it before condemaing it. With a trace of eider 
vinegar or lemon juice it \& fully eqxml to the famous 
huckleberry pie of our early daj'S in the eastern 
states.' " 

"The elderberry (Sambucus Canntlengis) was intro- 
duced independently in 1890 by Frank Ford & Son 


(Fig. 107), and D. Brandt, Bremen, Ohio. The stoek 
introduced by the Fords was not named. Mr. Ford 
writes that he *did not propagate it for sale, but dug 
the roots from clumps that produced large fruit. We 
sold very few plants, and shall not catalogue it again 
until we can propagate stock from a few plants which 
I know, and which produce berries nearly one -fourth 
inch in diameter.' The stock introduced by Brandt 
was called the Brain ard. It was first discovered 
in a thicket, in Fairfield county, Ohio, by 6. W. 
Brainard." * 

High 'bush Cranberry {Viburnum Opulus) 

The plant which, in the Old World, has given rise 
to the garden snowball, also produces verj' acceptable 
acid red berries. The plant is native to this countrj-, 
also, and in northern New England and other parts of 
the northern states and Canada, the fruits are much 
esteemed for sauces. The plant has been introduced to 
the trade as a fruit -plant, but no varieties have re- 
ceived names. Fig. 108 is a picture of a cluster of 
fruit from a plant bought from a nurseryman as high- 
bush cranberry. 

The high -bush cranberry is variable in a wild state, 
and it is also so unlike the European plant that bota- 
nists have long been divided as to whether it should 
not receive a separate name. For myself, I believe 
that the plants of the two continents should be re- 
garded as distinct species ; and in that case Philip 
Miller's Viburnum Americanum (1768) should be the 
name of the American plant. Michaux (1803) threw 

*AnnalB Hort. 1891, 62. 


Opnivt. Nurl7 fnll ■!». 

Viburnum Opuhis into three groups or varieties, — V. 
Opuliis var. Etiropaanuni , var, Pimina, and var, edwle, 
the two last being North Ameriean. Pursh (in 1814) 
raised Michaux'a variety Pimina into a species under 
the name of V. Oxycoceos, and his variety edule to 
V. edule. Of V. Oxycoccos he saye : "Berries red, of 
an agreeable acid, resembling that of Cranberries, Vac- 


cinium nuicrocarpan, for which they are a very good 
substitute/' The plant grows on mountains of New 
York and New Jersey. Viburnum edule grows along 
the banks of rivers from "Canada to New York." He 
describes it as "a smaller and more upright shrub than 
the preceding species ; berries the same colour and size, 
but, when completely ripe, more agreeable to eat." 

The Cranberry 

The cranberry, the most unique of American horti- 
cultural products, was first cultivated, or rescued from 
mere wild bogs, about 1810. Its cultivation began to 
attract attention about 1840, although the difficulties 
connected with the growing of any new crop did not 
begin to clear away until about 1850. Cape Cod was 
the first cranberry -growing region, which was soon 
followed by New Jersey, and later by Wisconsin and 
other regions. The varieties now known are over a 
hundred, all having been picked up in bogs, and the 
annual product from tame bogs in the United States is 
more than eight hundred thousand bushels. 

The cranberry industry is so interesting that I 
transcribe an article which I wrote on "Cape Cod 
Cranberries," a few years since :* 

The cranberry- growing sections of the country are few and 
scattered. The Cape Cod district is the pioneer ground of cran- 
berry culture, and it still undoubtedly holds first rank in general 

*" American Oarden,^ October, 1890. This paper called out an article on 
cranberry growins in New Jersey, by John 6. Smith, ** Garden and Forest," 
November 5, 1890. The books specially devoted to the cranberry are : J.J. 
White, "Cranberry Culture," 1st ed., 1870, 2nd ed., 1885 ; James Webb, "Cape 
<'od Cranberries," 1886 ; B. Eastwood, "Complete Manual for the Cultivation of 
the Cranberry," 1856 ; A. H. Biehards, "The Cranberry and its Culture," 1870. 


reputaUan. The country in which these Cape Cod berries are 
prodnoed is a most peculiar and interesting one. In fact, it is a 
surprise to anyone not intimately acquainted with it.' 

Let the reader lay before him a map of Massachusetts, and 
locate Plymouth and Barnstable counties upon its eastern ex- 
tremity. Upon the south, Buzzard's Bay thrusta Itself between 
the two counties, and all but cuts off the lon^ and low hook which 
stretches eastward and northward to Cape Cod. In provincial 
parlance, the Cape Cod region includes all the peninsular part of 
the state, beginning with the lower and eastward projection of 
Plymouth county. The cranberry region extends from this 
eastern part of Plymouth county eastward to the elbow of the 
peninsula, or, perhaps, even farther. 

Upon one of the upper arms of Buzzard's Bay the reader 
may locate the old and quaint town of Wareham. Here the tides 
flow over long marshes bordering the inlet, and rise along the 
little river which flows lazily in from the Plymouth woods. Here 
the sea-coast vegetation meets the thickets of alder and bay- 
berry and sweet fern, with their dashes of wild roses and vibur- 
nums. And in sheltered ponds the sweet water-lily grows with 
rushes and pond- weeds in the most delightful abandon. In the 
warm and sandy glades two kinds of dwarf oak grow in profusion, 
bearing their multitude of acorns upon bushes scarcely as high 
as one's head. The dwarf chestnut oak is often laden with its 
pretty fruits when only two or three feet high, and it is one of 
the prettiest shrubs in our eastern flora. 

We drive northward over the winding and sandy roads into 
the town of Carver, where the largest cranberry plantations are 
located. We are now headed towards Plymouth, and our journey 
lies in the *^ Plymouth woods." And here the surprises begin ! 
Do you look for fields of corn and grass, and snug New England 
gardens, and quaint old houses whose genealogies run into centu- 
ries f Yes, yon are picturing an old and overworn country, froih 
which the impetuous youths have long ago fted to the new lands 
of the West. But while we are busy with our expectations, we 
are plunging into a wilderness! — not fl second growth, half- 
civilized forest, but a primitive waste of sand and pitch-pine and 
oaks I The country has never been cleared, and it is not yet 
settled! And in its wilder parts deer are still hunted, and 


lesser game is frequent! And only fifty miles away is the bus- 
tling hub of the universe! 

This Cape Cod region is but a part of the sandy waste which 
stretches southward and westward through Nantucket, along the 
north shore of the Sound and throughout a large part of Liong 
Island ; and essentially the same formation is continued along the 
Jersey seaboard. Similarities of soil and topography are always 
well illustrated by the plants they produce. The 'pine barren* 
flora of New Jersey reaches northward into the Cape country, 
only losing some of its more southern types because of the 
shorter and severer seasons. But more diligent herborizing will 
no doubt reveal closer relationship between New Jersey and Cape 
Cod than we now know. An instance in my own experience 
illustrates this. The striped sedge (Carex striata var. brevis) is 
recorded as a rare plant, growing in pine barrens from New Jer- 
sey southward, and yet in these Plymouth woods, in the half 
sandy marshes, I found it growing in profusion. Even eastern 
Massachusetts is in need of botanical exploration! So the floras 
run along this coast ; and it is not strange that Cape Cod and New- 
Jersey are both great cranberry-producing regions. 

The country comprises an alternation of low, sandy eleva- 
tions and small swamps in which the cassandra, or leather- leaf, 
and other heath-like plants thrive. The pitch-pine makes open 
and scattered forests, or in some parts oaks and birches and other 
trees cover the better reaches. Fire has overrun the country in 
many places, leaving wide and open stretches carpeted with bear- 
berry (Arctostaphylos) and dwarf blueberries. There are no 
fences, no improvements, except such improvised structures as 
may be seen now and then about some isolated cranberry bog. 
At one place we came suddenly upon a school house of perhaps 
twelve by twenty, standing lonely and bare in the midst of a 
scrub-oak wilderness, with not a house in sight. Clear and hand- 
some little lakes are found in some parts of the wilderness, end 
upon the banks of one we found a hermitage where a half-dozen 
Boston men shut themselves off from the world in the summer 
months. Everywhere one finds clear and winding brooks, abound- 
ing in trout. And over all the open glades, the great- flowered 
aster {Aster spectabilis) is brilliant in the autumn sun. 

It is in the occasional swamps in this sandy region that the 


cranberry plantations, or *^bogs," as they are called in Massa- 
chusetts, are made. In their wild state these bogs look unprom- 
ising enough, being choked with bushes and brakes. It has 
required considerable courage to attack and subdue them. I am 
filled with a constant wonder that the sandy plains are not also 
utilized for the cultivation of blueberries. These fruits now 
grow in abundance over large areas, and they are gathered for 
market. It would only be necessary to enclose the areas, protect 
them from fire, and remove the miscellaneous vegetation, to have 
a civilized blueberry farm. Certainly cranberry and blueberry 
farms should make an interesting and profitable combination. 
The expense of growing the blueberries would be exceedingly 
slight, and the crop would be oflE before cranberry picking 
begins. With greater attention given to the crop, we should no 
doubt soon find out why it is that the berries fail in certain years, 
and it is possible that some control could be exercised. I have 
often predicted that large areas of the great pine plains of 
Michigan — which look much like the Massachusetts barrens — 
will eventually be used for the growing of blueberries. To be 
sure, wild berries are yet common, but they would not interfere 
with the sale of better and cleaner berries which should come 
from civilized plantations. Wild cranberries are still abundant 
over thousands of acres, and the production of cultivated berries 
is rapidly increasing ; yet the price has advanced from 50 cents 
and $1 per bushel, with an uncertain market, 50 years ago, to 
15 and 20 cents a quart. Wild blackberries are still abundant, 
yet they do not interfere with the sale of cultivated sorts. 

The largest cultivated bog in existence lies about six miles 
north of Wareham, and is under the management of A. D. Make- 
peace, one of the oldest and most experienced cranberry - growers 
in the country. This bog is 160 acres in extent. Other bogs in 
the vicinity belong to the same management. These bogs are all 
as clean as the tidiest garden. The long and level stretches, like 
a carpet strewn with white and crimson beads, are a most pleasing 
and novel sight. Here in early September a thousand pickers 
camp about the swamps, some in temporary board cabins, but 
most of them in tents. The manager furnishes the provisions, 
which the campers cook for themselves, and he rents them the 
tents. One hundred and twenty pickers constitute a ^^ company," 



which is placed in charge of an overseer, and each company has a 
book-keeper. Each picker is assigned a strip about three feet 
wide across the bog, and he is obliged to pick it clean, as he goes.* 
The pickers are paid by the measure, which is a broad six- 
quart pail w^ith ridges marking the quarts. Ten cents is paid 
for a measure. There is wide variation in the quantity which a 
picker will gather in a day, ranging all the way from ten measures 
for a slow picker, to forty and even fifty for a rapid one ; and in 
extra good picking, seventy - five measures have been secured. 

Various devices have been contrived for facilitating cran- 
berry picking. The Cape Cod growers like the Lumbert picker 
best.t This is essentially a mouse -trap -like box with a front lid 
raising by a spiral spring. The operator thnists the picker for- 
ward into the vines, closes the lid by bearing down with his 
thumb, and then draws the implement backwards so as to pull off 
the berries. Perhaps a fourth of the pickers use the implement. 
Children are not strong enough to handle it continuously, and 
where the crop is thin it possesses little advantage. Raking off the 
berries is rarely practiced in the Cape Cod region. It is a rough 
operation, and it tears the vines badly. Late in fall, if picking has 
been delayed and frost is expected or pickers are scarce, the rake 
is sometimes used. An ordinary steel garden rake is employed. 
The berries are raked off the vines, and the bog may then be flooded 
and the berries are carried to the flume, where they are secured. 

This picking time is a sort of a long and happy picnic— all 
the happier for being a busy one. The pickers look forward to it 
from year to year. They are invigorated by the change and the 
novelty, and they must come near to nature in the sweet and 
mellow October days. Those of our readers who have cast their 
lot with hop-pickers, or who have camped in the clearings in 
blackberry time, or who have joined the excursions to huckleberry 
swamps, can know something of the cranberry picker's experi- 
ences. Yet I fancy that one must actually pick the cran- 
berries in the drowsy Indian summer to know fully what 
cranberry-picking is like. 

The berries must now be sorted or '^screened." If there are 
no unsound berries, the fruit can be fairly well cleaned by 

•Fl«. 00, tFig. 83(9) , « Principles of Fruit-Growing." 



ranning it throagh n fanning mill ; and some growers flud it an 
advantBge to pat all the berries through the mill before they go to 
the hand screeners. A Bf^reen is a slatted traj about six feet long 
and three and a-half wide at one end and tapering to about ten 
inches at the other, with a side or border five or six inches high.* 
The spaces in the bottom between the slats are about one-fonrth 
inch wide. The screen is set npon ^/^ 

saw-horses, and three women stand --iT-^ 

upon a side and handle < 
berries, removing the poor ( 
tJie leaves and sticks, and working ■ 
the good ones towards the 
smnll and open end, where 

tbej fall into a re- 
ceptacle The hemes 
are barreled directly if 
they are not moist, but 
if wet they are first 
spread upon sheets of 
cam as— old sails being 
favorites— and allowed 
to remain until thor- 
oughly dry 

'j'^^ ^^^ ^^y The (iiltimted cranberry is a native 

-*ii«ni ^^&r of our nrrHiKrn stales It was first cul 

tivated abont 1141(1, but its culture had 
not become general until forty or fifty 
years later. The bemes naturally vary in size and shape and 
color, and three general types, named in reference to their 
forms, were early aiBtingnished — the Bell, the Bugle and the 
Cherry These types are represented in Figs 109 to 111, respec- 
tively As late as 1856 there appeals to be no record of any partic 
nlar named varieties aside from these general types But there 

'Shown in Fig. lOS, "Princlplw of Fnilt-Orowlnt.' 


are WU17 named Borta in cultivBtioii now. These have been 
multiplied from Eome eaperior or dietinct plant which some' 
one haa observed and marked. 
Tarieties in bis lorgeHt bog. 
The common favorite is 
the Early Black, shown nat- 
ural size in Fig. 100. This 

-valuable because of ita 

three weeks ahead of (he 
medium sorts Piekingbe- 
upon this -variety about 
the first of September in the 
Cope Cod bogs Whenfnlly 
npe, the berries are purple- 
favoriles with eonsumera, 
that pale berries 
are unripe. In late fall, the foliage of the Early Black asenmes 
a purplish tinge, which readily distingMishea it from most other 

The Dennis, a bugle berry (Fig. 110), is also a favoriUi 
because of i(s good size, productiveness and bright scarlet color. 
The fruit is picked late in aeptember and early in October. The 
foliage is darker than that of the Early Bed. 

The McFariiii, an oval, dark red berry, is probably the 
lai'gest ifite berry grown. 

The Gould (named for Dr. Gould, of Cape Cod) is a produo- 
tive penr berry, of medium season, with a bright purple fruit and 
light colored foliage. 

Lewie is probably the most brilliantly colored of the cran- 
berries. It is a very bright, glossy scarlet, medium in season, 
and pear-like in shape. 

Franklin is a comparatively new pear sort, as late as Dennis, 


purple-red, with a high habit of growth. It appeftra to hare 
little to reoomiuend it above older sorts. 

A new berry which Mr. Makepeace Bbowed me appears to 
oombliie more merita than any berry which I have ever Been. 
Some twelve years ago he observed the orifcinoJ plants in a 
neighbor's bog, occupying a space about six feet square, and he 
procured a few cuttings. The small bog which he now has of it 
is well worth a journey to see. The berries are unusually large, 
cherry - shaped, a little later than Early Black, and a bright rose- 

Fle 111 MakepfAce 

pnrple It ii probably the largest early berry It Is shown 
natural size in Fig 111 I take pleasure in calling it the 

It IS an arduous labor to subdue a wild bog The bushes 
and trees must be removed roots and all and it is usually nee- 


essary to remove the upper foot or so of the surface in order to 
get rid of the roots, bushes and undecayed accumulations. This 
process is termed 'Hurfing.'* The turf is conunonly ent into 
small squares and hauled off. It is necessary to leave the surface 
level and even, in order that all the plants may have an equal 
chance and thereby make an even and continuous bed, and to 
avoid inequalities in flooding. Although the cranberry thrives in 
swamps and endures flooding at certain seasons, it nevertheless 
demands comparative dryness during the growing and fruiting 
season. The swamp must, therefore, be drained. Open ditches 
are cut at intervals of four or five rods, about two feet deep, and 
these lead into the main or flooding ditch. It is also often neces- 
sary to run a ditch around the outside of the bog to catch the 
wash from the banks. The areas enclosed within the intersections 
of the ditches are called sections, and each section is commonly- 
planted to a single variety. The main ditch is usually a straight- 
ened creek, or it carries the overflow from a reservoir which may- 
be built for the purpose of affording water to flood the bog. 
Growers always divert a creek through the bog if possible. In 
the Cape Cod districts these creeks are often clear trout brooks. 
The main ditch is strongly dammed to allow of flooding. 

Before planting is done, the bog is sanded. This operation 
consists in covering the whole surface with about four inches of 
clean and coarse sand, free from roots and weeds. The chief 
object of sanding is to prevent too rapid growth and consequent 
unproductiveness of vines. In wild bogs, the cranberry rarely 
roots deeply in the muck, but subsists rather in the loose sphag- 
num moss. Vines that grow in pure muck rarely produce well. 

The sand also serves as a mulch to the muck, mitigating 
extremes of drought and moisture. It also prevents the heaving 
of the vines in winter, and it aids in subduing weeds. Every 
four or five years after the bog begins to bear it is necessary to 
re-sand it, in order to maintain productiveness. These subsequent 
applications are light, however, seldom more than a half inch in 
depth. The Cape Cod bogs are fortunate in their proximity to 
the sand. 

It was once the practice to plant cranberry vines in "sods,'' 
or clumps, just as they are dug from the swamps. There are 
several vital objections to this operation, and it is now given 


ap. It is expensive, the vines are apt to be old and stunted, an 
even "stand'* can rarely be secured, and many pernicious weeds 
and bushes are introduced. Cuttinf?s are now used exclusively. 
These are made from vigorous runners, and are six or eight 
inches in length. They are thrust obliquely through the sand, 
about an inch and a half or two inches of the tip being allowed 
to project. They are set in early spring, about fourteen inches 
apart each way. In two or three weeks they begin to grow, and 
in three or four years a full crop is obtained. The subsequent 
cultivation consists in keeping the bog clean. A small force is 
employed during the summer months in pulling weeds. Under 
ordinary conditions it costs from $300 to $500 per acre to fit and 
plant a bog. 

Opinions vary as to the best times and frequency of flood- 
ing. There are those who contend that flooding is not necessary, 
and it is a fact that there are some "dry bogs'' which are suc- 
cessful. It is no doubt true that the value of flooding varies 
with conditions. It appears to be generally held that bogs are 
longer lived and more productive if judiciously flooded, and it 
is certainly true that flooding is often the very best remedy for 
insect attacks. The reasons for flooding, so far as I know, are 
five : ( 1 ) To protect the plants from heaving in the winter ; 
(2) to avoid late spring and early fall frosts ; (3) to drown out 
insects ; (4) to protect from drought ; (5) to guard against fire, 
which sometimes works sad havoc in the muck. Mr. Makepeace 
prefers to fiood but once a year, unless insects appear in serious 
numbers. He lets on the water in December and draws it off 
in April or early in May. Just enough water is used to com- 
pletely cover the vines in all parts of the bog. 

There are many hindrances to cranberry -growing. The 
chief are spring and fall frosts, hail, numerous insects and some 
fungous diseases. During the summer season the bogs are not 
flooded, and insects must be kept in check by insecticides. 
Tobacco water is commonly used. The liquid is applied with 
hand -pumps from the middle of May to late in June. It is 
supposed that it has some value as a fertilizer also. 

Fifty barrels per acre is a good crop of cranberries, yet 200 
barrels have been produced. The grower usually gets from $5 
to $10 per barrel of 100 quarts. It does not appear to be known 


how long a well-handled bog will continue to be profitable, but 
Mr. Makepeace assares me that he knows a bog thirty years 
old which is still in good condition. 

This cultivated cranberry is Vaccinium macrocarpon. 
There are other edible species, but they are not culti- 
vated. The cowberry, or mountain cranberry, Vaccin- 
ium Vitis'ldcea, is gathered in great quantities in 
Canada, where it is used for sauces (page 388). It is 
also native to Europe, where it is also much prized as 
a culinary fruit. 

The Strawherry 

Wild strawberries are among the commonest and 
most esteemed of American fruits. They run into 
many forms, into so many, in fact, that botanists 
cannot agree as to what are varieties and what are 
species. From the earliest times, the native straw- 
berries have been transferred to gardens, and at one 
time considerable progress had been made in their 
amelioration. Of some of this early history in New 
England, Stone writes as follows:* 

It is well known that this fruit has been cultivated for cen- 
turies in the Old World, but some misconception seems to exist 
in regard to the date of the cultivation of the strawberry in New 
England, as well as to its abundance in early times. In the last 
report of the Connecticut State Board of Agriculture, page 66, a 
member stated that he could not find that the strawberry was 
cultivated here in gardens previous to 1824. Dr. Timothy 
Dwight, in his delightful volumes of "Travels in New England," 
published in 1821, though written earlier than 1817, gives a list 
of five different varieties of strawberries, four of which he had 
under cultivation in his garden. He mentions the following 

♦tr. E. Stone, "The Strawberry in New England," Garden and Forest. Feb. 

26, 1800. 


yarieties: The Bed Meadow, White Meadow, Field, Hudson and 
Hautboy. Dr. Dwight says: "The Meadow strawberry of this 
country is the best fruit of the kind whioh I have seen. It is 
rather larger than the Chili Bweet, and more prolific. It also 
improves greatly by culture. I have seen several which were 
four and a half inches in circumference, many which were four, 
and bushels which were between three and four.** And he futher 
states: **I have cultivated the Wild Meadow strawberry more 
than twenty years, and during that time it has increased to 
twice its original size.'' 

In regard to the Field strawberry, he says that it "is 
sweeter, ten days earlier, but much smaller than the Meadow 
strawberry, and has not increased in size by a cultivation of 
eight years in my garden. The plants become immediately much 
larger, but the fruit has not been changed at all." He also 
mentions the Hautboy and Hudson varieties as having been in 
cultivation for many years in his garden. The former variety is 
a well-known European form; the latter is a form I am not 
familiar with, although I suspect it to be an old cultivated 
variety common in these days. These statements of Dr. Dwight, 
who died in 1817, show that the strawberry was in cultivation in 
New England before the beginning of this century. 

He, moreover, states that the Hautboy strawberrry, Fragaria 
elatioTj has been found growing spontaneously in two distinct 
and remote localities in Connecticut. This statement, if true, 
would undoubtedly indicate that they were introduced through 
the agency of birds.* 

The White Meadow strawberiy which he calls attention to 
is a mere sport or variety of the ordinary Red strawberry. It is 
also mentioned by Dr. Dewey, in his "Plants of Massachusetts," 
1840, page 59, as occurring plentifully in the Berkshire Hills. 

In regard to the abundance of the strawberry in early times, 
there appears to be some misconception also. Every one is 
aware that there are few places in Massachusetts where it would 
be possible now for one to gather more than a few pints of 
strawberries in a whole day. In early times, however, when 
there was more virgin soil than there is to-day in New England, 

* The native wild Fragaria vetea Cor F. A merieana) was probably confounded, 
with the European Hautbois.— L. H. fi. 


the wild strawberry was very abundant, and frequently grew to 
a much larger size than at present; and even within the recol- 
lection of men now living, this fruit was by no means rare in 
this state, neither is it in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick 
to-day. William Wood, an early visitor and accurate observer, 
states in his *^New England Prospect, '^ published in 1635, that 
^Hliere is, likewise, growing all manner of Hearbes for meate 
and medicin, and that not onely in planted Gardens, but in the 
woods, without either the art or helpe of man. * * * There 
is, likewise, Strawberies in abundance, verie large ones, some 
being two inches about; one may gather halfe a bushell in afore- 
noone " [p .386] . And in 1643 Roger Williams wroto : " This berry 
[Strawberry] is the wonder of all the fruits growing naturally 
in those parts; it is of itself excellent, so that one of the 
cheiftest doctors of England was wont to say that God could 
have made, but never did, a better berry. * * * In some 
parts, where the natives have planted, I have many times seen 
as many as would fill a good ship within a few miles' compasse. 
The Indians bruise them in a mottar and mixe them with meale 
and make Strawberry bread." Strawberry bread appears to have 
been in common use among the Indians, as we find it mentioned 
by other writers, notably Gorkin, who was a co-worker with Rev. 
John Eliot among the Nipmucks and other Massachusetts tribes. 
These statements, with many others which could be cited, show 
conclusively that the wild strawberry was once very abundant 
here in New England, and undoubtedly the principal reason for 
the decline of this wild fruit is the exhausted conditions of our 
soil. In early times the clearing of an old wood gave rise to 
abundance of these berries, and they were noted as being 
abundant in our meadows. The strawberry, however, is not 
the only natural crop that has changed. Many of our meadows, 
which now produce a crop of grass hardly worth cutting, once 
supported a luxuriant growth of the fowl meadow grass, ^ thick 
and long, as high as a man's middle, some as high as the 
shoulders, so that a good mower might cut three load a day." 
To-day, however, hardly less should be expected, since for 
generations crops have been removed from the soil without the 
return of any plant -food, whereas in olden time, before the 
advent of the white man, everji;hing was allowed to decay 


wbere it fel), wliich meant a conttiderable yearly 
organio mutter to the soil. 

The advent of the Chilian strawberry in European 
and American gardens, and its phenomenally rapid 

amelioration, obscured the native species, however, 
and the latter are now practically out of cultivation. 
Now and then some evidence of native blood can be 
seen in an early variety, but the inflnence of our 


field strawberry m the iniprovemeut of the gardeu 
varieties has evidently been very small. 

A full discussion of this strawberry evolution is 
made in Essay XSV., "Survival of the Unlike," and it 
is, therefore, unnecessary to pursue the subject here. 

It may be said, however, that there are three leading: 
groups or types of strawberries native to North Amer- 
ica, — the Scarlet or Virginian group, the Vesea or Old 


World group, aud the Chiliaa or Pacific ^roup. All 
these groups are perplexingly variable. 

The Virginian strawberry is the commoD field and 
meadow strawberrj' of the eastern states. It has 
received many names from botanists, 
the oldest being Fragaria rirginiatia 
of Duchesne (1766). Its features oie , 
clearly depicted in Figs. 112, 113 and 
114, — the biuntish- toothed, thickish 
leaflets overtopping the flowers, the 
small drooping- rayed fruit truss, and 
the globular-pitted berrj'. On moun- Fi». lu. Fruit ot 
tains and along our northern bordei-s Nuumi"if "^ 
and in Canada, the plant lM.'comes 
squat, and this form was called Frngnria Canadensis 
by Miehaux. I have stH'U Michaux's specimens in his 
herbarium at Paris {from Lake Mistasainiea) , and they 
loot distinct enough from the field strawberry of lower 
latitudi's and altitudes ; but it is doubtful if it is worth 
while to keep thera apart as distinct species. William 
R. Prince, the Long Island nurseryman, proposed two 
large prairie forms of the strawberry as distinct spe- 
cies in 1862 (Proc. Araer. Pom. Soc. viii. 206), naming 
them Fragaria lowensis and F. lUinoensis. The latter 
name has since been used for the larger- growing forms 
of the species, as Fragaria Virginiana var. lUinoensis. 

The native strawberry of Europe is eharacteriEed by 
thin, light green, and sharp-toothed leaflets, which are 
overtopped by the flowers, by a email and weak truss, 
and a more or less elongated berry with the seeds not 
imbedded in the flesh. This type of strawberry is also 
common in the northernmost states and Canada, and 
throughout our mountain systems. There is some 


doubt as to whether the Ameriean plant is closely 
enough like the European to warrant one in calling it 
the same species Until very recent jears it has been 

of the European plant Fragaria 

known bv the 

vesca, but Professor Porter now proposes to call it 
Fragaria Americana. The Cordilleran form of it has 
been known as Fragaria Mericana. The characters of 
the plant are well shown in Figs. 115 and 116. There 
are white -fruited forms. Fragaria Americana has never 
been ameliorated by the plant -breeder, and it has less 


promise than the other types of native strawberries.* 

The Chilian strawberry {Fragaria Chiloensis), from 
which the garden berries have come, is also native to 
the Pacific coast region of North America ; and outly- 

'Fn^aria braetfata la a Naw MeilcAa apt* 
thla book want la pnna (Ball. Torr. Bol. Clnb 
from Idaho. It U HIM to F. ATmHcana. 


ing forms of thia type are known as Fragaria Califor- 
nica and F. glutica. Figs. 117 and 118 show some of 
its characteristics, — the thick, bhint-toothed leaflets, 
low frait- clusters with sprawling -rayed trusses, and 
conical -pitted berries. It is possible that useful 
varieties may be obtained from thia North American 
Chiloensis group, although the garden progeny of its 
South American branch is already so good that there is 
little reason for returning to the wild for a new start. 



There are great numbers of trees in North America, 
small and large, which produce edible fruit, some of 
which must come to be the parents of important fruit- 
bearing races. Of a few of these, something has 
already been done towards domestication ; and the 
most important of these may be mentioned. 

The Persimmon 

We have already seen (page 172) that the wild 
persimmons attracted the attention of the explorers 
and colonists, by many of whom they were called- 
plums. Over a hundred years ago, experiments were 
detailed for the utilization of this fruit in the making 
of wine,* and the fruit is still employed in parts of 
the South in the manufacture of domestic liquors. 
Perhaps there is no native fruit which is more varia- 
ble than the persimmon. It is not improbable that 
more than one species is passing under the name of 
Diospyros Virginiana. This at once argues that the 
persimmon is capable of rapid amelioration. Several 
extra good forms have been transferred to cultivated 
grounds and have received names. Troop and Had- 
ley's bulletin, t which is the best literature yet made 

* Isaac Bartram, "A memoir on the distillation of persimmons," In Trans. 
Amer. Phil. See. i. 301 (1789). 

t*^ The American Persimmon," Boll. 60, Indiana Exp. Sta. (Apr. 1890). 
BE (433) 


on the subject, describes eight of these varieties, — 
Shoto, Early Bearing, Golden Gem, Daniel Boone, 
Hicks, Kansas, Smeech, Early Golden. These writers 
speak as follows of the prospective merits of the 
species : 

The native persimmon, or date plnm, is one of our neglected 
wild fruits which has heretofore received but little attention 
from the fruit-growers of this country, although it possesses 
many desirable qualities which, when brought to a higher state 
of perfection by selection and cross-fertilization, will certainly 
cause it to be more highly appreciated by all lovers of good 
fruit. But little literature is to be found on the subject, and so 
the general public is quite ignorant concerning its real merits. 
The fruit is scarcely known except by those who live in sections 
of the country where it grows wild, and even in these localities, 
but little attention has been given to its cultivation. 

From recent personal investigations, we have found the per- 
simmon growing wild in many portions of the southern half of 
this state, and producing, in some instances, a fruit of excellent 
quality and in great abundance ; and yet so little attention is 
given to it by the farmers in these localities that hundreds of 
bushels of fruit are annually allowed to waste on the ground. 
There are various reasons why this fruit has been hithert-o 
neglected. One is the exceedingly astringent or puokery prin- 
ciple which the green fruit contains, and which remains with 
most wild varieties until thoroughly ripe, some never losing it 
entirely. Again, in most instances, where cultivation has been 
attempted, suckers or seedlings have been used for planting, 
and these generally die, or if they live, produce inferior fruit, 
or prove to be sterile. Another discouraging feature was that it 
required a long time for the trees to come into bearing. But a 
new condition of things is being brought about, so that these 
difficulties will soon be largely removed. New methods of propa- 
gation and cultivation are being introduced in its culture, so 
that now trees frequently begin bearing at from three to five 
years from the bud or graft, and we believe that this fruit is 
capable of being improved to such an extent as to make it 
equal to that of some of the Japanese varieties. 


Until recently there were no well defined varieties under 
cultivation. We have found, however, many well-marked varie- 
ties growing wild. They differ in quality as much as our culti- 
vated apples. Some are very astringent, others are insipid and 
worthless, while still others are sweet and delicious. Almost 
every tree is a variety of itself, as the persimmon, like the 
apple, does not reproduce itself from seed with certainty. In 
the wild state it is sometimes found growing in clusters of ten 
or a dozen trees, and all apparently of the same variety, 
but these probably came from the roots of the original or parent 
tree. The fruit differs in size from that of a small wild plum 
to that of the large cultivated kinds, an inch and a -half to two 
inches in diameter. They also vary greatly in form : some are 
globular, others either conical or oblong, those of the globular 
form predominating. 

The persimmon is readily propagated from seeds, whic'.i 
should be procured in the fall or early winter, and planted in 
the same manner as peach pits. The young seedlings will often 
attain a height of over two feet the first season. These seed- 
lings, especially from cultivated varieties, cannot be depended 
upon to reproduce themselves. In fact, this frait varies greatly 
in the wild state. Twenty trees raised from the seeds of one 
parent tree may produce twenty distinct varieties ; we must 
therefore resort to budding or grafting the young stocks with 
buds or cions from the variety which we desire to propagate. 
A desirable seedling variety may be multiplied by breaking up 
the roots of the parent tree, thus causing it to throw up sprouts 
or suckers. These, however, are difficult to transplant success- 
fully, owing to a deficiency of root development. 

The following extracts from a letter from Eli H. 
Chandler, Marietta, Ga., show how variable the 
persimmon is : 

In northern Delaware some thirty years ago were two trees 
(the only ones in the neighborhood) whose fruit myself and 
brothers highly esteemed. 8ix miles from there was a grove of 
persimmon trees equally desirable from a fruit standpoint, and I 
knew of a very few isolated trees in Chester and Delaware 
counties, Pennsylvania. On none of these trees was the fmit 


ripe until after very heavy frosts, and we usually gathered it 
after the first snow storm. The trees bore biennially, and were 
at least eight to ten years old before they came into bearing. 

In eastern Kansas (Wyandotte and Bourbon counties, par- 
ticularly), and generally in western Missouri, I have gathered an 
abundance of good persimmons, always after heavy frosts. The 
trees in that section bore at an earlier age than in the East, but 
otherwise I could see no difference between the fruits of those 
and the eastern trees, except that the eastern trees were on 
uplands, and those in the West mostly on low lands. 

Here, in Georgia, the conditions are different. The trees grow 
everywhere, bear immense crops biennially, and ripen from Sep- 
tember 1 to February 1 ; that is, we have trees whose fruits ripen 
early, and others that are not fit to eat until after frost; some not 
good at all. I ate my first persimmons this season September 1 , 
and three weeks afterwards the fruit on that tree was all gone. 
I had very fair persimmons January 15, from trees whose fruits 
were unfit to eat December 15. I know of three small trees (in 
a clump) some fifty miles from here, whose earliest fruits ripen 
in October, and the latest can be kept until December 20. The 
fruits are as large as a small Mandarin orange, three to five seeds, 
sweet, melting and juicy, no pungency whatever, and comparable 
in lusciousness with a ripe Seckel pear. I have hunted over hun- 
dreds of square miles and examined thousands of persimmon 
trees, but have never found the equal of these fruits for size, early 
and continuous ripening and lusciousness, nor have I seen 
anything anywhere to compare with them in size, and only one 
tree whose fruits are as fine -flavored. I esteem them more 
highly than the Japanese persimmon as it is produced here. 
They are superior in every way except in size. 

What; we call (in the family) the "premium tree" is growing 
about three miles from here, and we have been making weekly 
visits to it from early in October until late in December. The 
fruit from this tree is about the size of a small black walnut, 
deep yellow with a blush on the sunny side, a down or bloom 
similar to some plums; sweet, juicy, rich, melting, with no pun- 
gency, and mostly only three seeds. 

Some trees here bear fruits no larger than a good-sized 
cherry. On some the outer skin turns black when the fruit is 



ripe; these are the last to ripea. Some are diy and sugary 

when ripe, and man; are alnaya pucker;. Saplings three feet 

high are loaded nith fruit, and the largest trees reach thirty feet. 

The natives seem to care littJe for them; even the negroes 

Natnml glie 

scarcely eat them but do make them into simmon beer I 
ha^e oome in coDtai>t with natiies in the monntaiDB who did not 
know they were fit to eat I bel eve that a plantation ot i-arefuUy 
Keleoted tree'' properly pared for and marketed m the best 
season would be a paying investment 

The Japanese persimmon, or kaki, has been brought 


to a high degree of perfection, the fruit being eaten 
from the hand, in various culinary {H*eparations, and 
as a dried fig -like conserve. The kaki has been intro- 
duced to this country, and is already establishing a 
reputation in the better markets. This noble fruit has 
called attention anew to the native persimmon, and 
particularly so since the foreigner will not thrive 
north of Washington, whereas the native will often 
fruit as far north as Massachusetts. It is very prob- 
able that the two species will hybridize, and that the 
amalgamation will give something of distinct value. 
But even if hybrids are not obtained, the native 
species is capable of great direct improvement. Figs. 
119 and 120 (from Georgeson, in "American Garden") 
show two average varieties of the kaki ; and when 
Figs. 121 and 122 are compared with them, it will be 
seen that the chance for improvement is great. 

The following sketch of the effect of cultivation 
on the persimmon was contributed to "American 
Garden" in 1892, by J. W. B., Queens county, X. Y. : 

The native persimmon varies much in its habit of growth 
and in its general characteristics, according to locality, nutrition 
or exposure. In New Jersey and the north of Pennsylvania and 
Ohio it is scarcely more than a tree-like shrub, while in the 
bottom-lands of Virginia and the Carolinas it frequently rises to 
a shapely tree forty feet high, covered with fruit which is dear 
to the heart of every southern boy in spite of its intense astrin- 
gency, which, in its green state, is like concentrated tannic acid. 
This is gradually lost as the fruit ripens, giving place to a mild, 
rich sweetness of pulp, which to some persons is very agreeable. 
Still, the persimmon, in its wild st^ite, is not a general favorite. 
It is eaten in the South chiefly by the omnivorous small boy and 
by the Voon and 'possum. Sometimes, also, it is mashed into a 
cake with cornmeal, and dried for the brewing of what is known 
among the "crackers" of Carolina as "'simmon beer." 



The Cftpncity for improvement however, of the American 
persimmon by cultivation is beyond question Fifteen years ago 
I had some eorreBpondence with the poet Bryant (whose zeal as 
n cultivator and whose interest m fruit growing were almost as 
great as his poetio enthusiasm) on the subject of the improve- 
ment of our nalive fruits by high cultivation Mr Bryant often 
insisted that the time would come when this would become one 
of the popular and marketable fruits of the middle states. He 
gathired spetimens and varieties of the Dtospyros Firginiana 
fiom all parts of the South and West, and cultivated them most 
carefully and his plpasant old home at Roslyn will doubtless 

FU 131 

wild penlminon Mstnnl alie 

show to day some rcliLS of his ingenious care m the laying out 
and arrantcemeot of bis experimental plantations 

Mr Bryant detided after many years of eipenment with the 
persimmon that the finest and most vigorous varieties were those 
gronn m the alluiial meadows of southern Indiana and he sent 
me soma specimens from one of nbich by high fertilization and 
root pruning I have from jear to year gathered fruit of greatly 
inprned size and flavor 1 enclose a rude sketch (Fig. 122) of 
one specimen of tli s jear a fruit from one of the trees received 
from Mr Bryant The smaller drawing (Pig 121) shows the wild 
fruit which has received no special care gathered from another 

As 1 have already said the aatnngency of the fruit is much 
diminished by cultivation while the flavor is improved; and, as 



in the JapBiieee peraimmou kaki, the pulp becomea more abun- 
dant, and the Beeds are rednced in uamber from five in the wild 
stala to two or even one, and often quite disappear, and tbe 
fruit beoomeB abaolntely Beedless. 

The perBimmon is nn ornamental tree, sfanpelj and Bym- 

Fta 122 Ksttre penli 

metrical ia form itB bark and leaveB are diBtinctive, and its 
wood is dense and heavy It grows readily but slowly from 
8«eds, is a gross feeder and with good cultivation and care, will 
produce fruit m its s \Ih >ear It i^ perfectly hardy as far 
north as Hartford Conn and w 11 b(ar fru t on Long Island 
from year to year witl out interruption 

The Custard-Apple Tribe 

In the tropics, the various custard -apples (anonas 
and their kio) are much esteemed, and some of tbem 
are grown in extreme southern Florida. We have 
only one native species. This is the pond-apple of 


soatbem Florida, known to botaiiistB eis Anona gltibm 
(or A. Jaurtfolia). It is a smail tree, sometimes 
reaching the height of thirty or forty feet. It is a 

F<a. 123. The Pond npple. Anoaa glabru. 

Btriking tree as it grows about the borders of the 
everglades, its roots lying nnder the water. A fniit is 
shown natural size, in section, in Fig. 123. It is 


oblong-conical, three to five inches long and two or 
three inches broad, light yellow and becoming brown- 
blotched, with many large, transverse seeds. The 
fruit is esteemed by the Indians, and it has been men- 
tioned as worthy of domestication, but although 
aromatic it is insipid, and is not likely to attract 
consumers. The fruit ripens in November. 

Of the asiminas, or so-called pawpaws, — which 
are also anonaceous plants, — there are several species 
in the United States. One of these, the northern 
pawpaw {Asimina triloba) bears large and comestible 
fruits, although most people do not relish the flavor. 
Typical fruits are shown in Fig. 124. One or two 
named varieties have been offered for sale. The plant 
is eminently worthy of cultivation for its ornamental 
qualities, but it is doubtful if we are to exi)ect much 
interest to be awakened in its fruit. 

The Thorn -Apples 

The genus Crataegus is very closely allied to the 
apples and pears, and it is rich in American species. 
Several of these thorn-apples produce fruit of great 
beauty, and some of the fruits are pulpy and edible, 
and are esteemed in various localities. As long ago 
as 1838, the Downings wrote of one of these thorns 
as follows:* "Mr. Longworth, of Cincinnati, one of 
the most distinguished horticulturists of the West, 
writes us, in a recent communication, that he dis- 
covered, in the interior of Ohio twenty -five years 
ago, a variety of haw, with fruit the size of a crab- 
apple, having a delicious flavor. He has lately re- 

♦Hovey's Ma«. Hort. 1838, 46. 



discovered it, and has kindly promised to forward us 
some grafts. Should it prove as fine as he anticipates, 
it will be quite an addition to our fruits, as it is 
probably very beautiful in appearance." 

None of these native thorns has been widely ad- 
vertised or sold except Cratcegus cordata, the Wash- 
ington thorn (Fig. 125), and this is known for hedges 
and ornament rather than for fruit. It is native in 
Kentucky and southern Illinois and southward, but 
is hardy in central New York. It has long been 
known in Europe. It is a beautiful tree, sometimes 
reaching a height of thirty feet, and bearing freely of 
bright red apple -like and pleasant -tasted fruits. 

The Nut- Fruits 

North America is peculiarly rich in its nuts. The 
reader will recall the chestnuts, many kinds of hicko- 
ries, walnuts, butternut, hazels, beechnut, nut pines, 
and sweet acorns. Of all these types, only one species 
has yet reached great commercial importance. This is 
the pecan, which is a sepcies of hickory. The second 
place in the progress of ameliorated native nuts is 
taken by the chestnut. Beyond these, there are 
no species which have attained to general importance 
in cultivation, although there are several named varie- 
ties of the shellbark hickories and the black walnut. 
The interest in this class of fruits is great, however ; 
in fact, it is probably greater than the commercial 
importance of the subject warrants, for nuts are very 
secondary articles of commerce and, not being per- 
ishable, they can be shipped any distance, or even 
kept from year to year. The excellent special litera- 

^r; . 


ture on the subject obviates any necessity of discuss- 
ing the subject in detail in this place. The reader 
should consult Fuller's "Nut Culturist," and the ex- 
haustive quarto report by the United States Depart- 
ment of Agriculture on "Nut Culture in the United 
States." For chestnuts, the reader may also consult 
Buckhout, "Chestnut Culture for Profit," Bull. 36, 
Pennsylvania Experiment Station ; and, for a sketch 
of the botany of the subject, Sargent's great "Silva" 
(which discusses the other nut trees also), and Bailey 
in "American Garden," May, 1891. 




Having thus seen what has actually been accom- 
plished in the amelioration of fruits which are native 
to this country, we may now take a general survey of 
the status of the subject and of the means by which 
the evolution has been accomplished. 

The chief reason for supposing that the native 
fruits should be domesticated seems to be the mosl 
obvious fact that they have merit in themselves ; and 
yet, paradoxical as it may seem, I imagine that this 
is not sufficient reason to recommend their ameliora- 
tion. It is not the thing which is intrinsically the 
best which necessarily deserves the most attention, 
but the thing which is most needed. We shall find 
our most helpful suggestions from a reflection on what 
has been accomplished and how it has been done, 
rather than from a mere objective study of the kinds 
of our wild fruits. I propose, therefore, to divide this 
essay into two parts, — what has been done, and 
what probably should be done. 

What Has Been Done 

The most obvious truth which strikes one when he 
attempts to make a reflective or historical study of 

* Reprint, with minor modiflcations, of a paper contributed by the anther 
to the Yearbook of the United States Department of Acrienlture for 1896. 



the improvement of our native fruits, is the fact that 
in nearly every case the amelioration has come from 
the force of circumstances and not from the choice or 
desigrn of men. Let me be specific. The colonists — 
in common with other good people — knew and loved 
wine. The beverage has been a hand to hand — or 
more truthfully a hand to mouth — companion of the 
human family from the first. The attempt was there- 
fore early and heroically made to grow the European 
or wine grape in eastern America; but the attempt 
failed. In sheer distress of failure, the grape -grower 
was driven to the use of the native grape. How 
literally true this was the reader may learn by read- 
ing the history of the grape colony of the Dufours in 
Kentucky and then in Indiana late in the last century 
and early in this, and noting the fact that the exist- 
ence of the colony, as such, depended upon the success 
of the wine. The salvation of the colony was the Alex- 
ander or Cape grape, which, in a most surreptitious 
way, had transferred itself from the wild into planta- 
tions which were at first designed to grow the Euro- 
pean varieties ; and later on, John Adlum's famous 
Catawba, a product of the Carolina highlands, added 
the crowning glorj*^ and success to the experiment, 
and thence spread itself along the Ohio and over 
the Union. And yet, while the Alexander and the 
Catawba were driving out the Old World types, the 
grape -growers were at the very time making a most 
determined opposition to native grapes. The fact is 
that the native grapes — the types which we now culti- 
vate — came into domestication in spite of us. 

The native plums — of which two hundred or more 
horticultural varieties are now described — came into 



domestication because the Old World plums, with which 
we are chiefly familiar in the northeastern states, will 
not thrive in the prairie states and the South. The 
cultivated native plums had been widely disseminated 
before horticultural annalists discovered the fact ; and 
there is no evidence that the early introducers of them 
had any suspicion that they were making history when 
they planted them. These plums were, no doubt, 
looked upon as a makeshift in a new country, — as a 
fruit which was better than none when good ones 
could not be had. 

The reason why the native raspberries came into 
cultivation was because the European species is tender 
in our climate, and demands too much care and pet- 
ting. The native types of gooseberries drove out the 
foreign ones because the latter are injuriously infested 
with the mildew. The native crabs are now demand- 
ing attention where the climate is so severe that the 
cultivated apple cannot thrive. The wild red mul- 
berry has been improved because the Old World black 
mulberry is tender, and we have been so ignorant of 
the fact that we have all along supposed that these 
natives are forms of the Old World species. The 
Chilian strawberry — the foundation stock of our 
commercial varieties — brought itself into domestication 
while men were bent upon impressing the Virginian 
berry into service ; and most of our writers still insist 
upon calling the common garden strawberries descend- 
ants of the latter species, so ignorant are they of 
the true course of the evolution. 

The obverse of this picture is likewise instructive 
in showing how difficult it is to introduce and to 
improve fruits which are not forced upon us. For a 


century and more, the native nuts have attracted the 
attention of economic writers. Their merits for food 
have been praised without stint for years. Two excel- 
lent books have been written about them. Yet they 
have made very little progress towards amelioration. 
The simple reason is that we have not been pressed 
by any necessity to grow them. No nuts are staple 
articles of food among the peoples who have chiefly 
settled the United States* They are essentially sub- 
sidiary and incidental features in our lives. So, 
while we all like hickory nuts and walnuts and the 
like, we are nevertheless not impelled by any over- 
mastering necessity to gather the trees into the garden 
or the orchard. We associate them more with the 
woods and the landscape and the outings, than we do 
with the kitchen and the larder. They have no con- 
spicuous places in our heritage of customs and asso- 
ciations, as the apples and grapes and berries have. 

Much the same observation can be made respect- 
ing the native huckleberries, fruits which have been 
recommended time and again as proper subjects for 
amelioration, and yet practically nothing has been 
done towards their improvement. The chief reason 
of this neglect is, it seems to me, that the imperative 
needs which the huckleberries may be supposed to 
satisfy, are already supplied in large measure by other 
berry-like fruits. 

There are apparent exceptions to all this in the 
cranberry and blackberry, for neither of these fruits 
had ever been an important food for the human race. 
Yet the very abundance of these fruits, and their 
adaptability to the common needs of life, forced them 
upon the attention of the settlers and colonists, who 


were often pressed for food. It was but natural that, 
as the wild areas of the fruits became restricted, at- 
tempts should have been made to grow the plants. 

The minor small fruits which have recently come 
into notice from the West have been impressed into 
domestication chiefly because of the comparative 
scarcity of domestic fruits in the regions from whence 
they come. Some of these are the buffalo -berry, the 
dwarf juneberry, the Crandall currant type, and the 
dwarf cherries and dwarf plums. 

Whereas the fact has been that the reigning types 
of improved native fruits have come into cultivation 
largely as a result of the force of conditions rather 
than as a direct or designed choice on the part of 
men, it nevertheless does not follow that intelligent 
choice of species has not played an important part in 
the evolution, and that it may not count for much 
more in the years to come. Yet the student should 
bear in mind the fact that all the most needful types 
of native fruits have now been impressed into cultiva- 
tion, and that those which yet remain in an almost 
wholly untutored condition, — as many of the nuts, 
the elderberries, the asimina, and others — will come 
into cultivation, if at all, only through the expendi- 
ture of great effort to make their merits and possi- 
bilities known. From now on, the attempt to intro- 
duce new types of native fruits must be, broadly 
speaking, a forced effort. But if this is true, it does 
not follow that our efforts at amelioration should 
cease, but rather that the most promising and the 
most useful expenditure of energy is to be found in 
still further improving the species which are already 
thoroughly established in cultivation, for none of 


these types are yet — and, in fact, never will be — 
brought to that condition when they may be said to 
be good enough. This conclusion, while apparently 
the only logical one, does not seem to have been 
reached by writers on the improvement of our na- 
tive fruits. The tendency of writers has always 
been, unfortunately, to press the importance of un- 
developed species, forgetting that the really impor- 
tant things are the ones which we already have, and 
all of which are far from perfect. The whole ques- 
tion, then, is simply that of the best methods of im- 
proving fruits, without respect to their nativities. 

Having now seen that new types of plants are 
impressed into cultivation largely because they are 
needed, and in an undesigned or almost fortuitous 
way, let us ask how these particular domestic fruits 
which are native to North America have been ame- 
liorated. The process has been a most simple one: 
attractive varieties, or forms, have been found and 
men have transferred them to the garden. This, in 
essence, has been the method of the amelioration of 
most domestic plants. It is first a discovery of a good 
form, and then the perpetuation of it. What has 
been called plant -breeding is mostly discovery; or, in 
other words, so far as the cultivator is concerned, it is 
accident.* In one place, an attractive wild blackberiy 

* These remarks concerning the accidental origin of varieties call out the 
following significant comment from Frank T. Swett, Contra Costa conuiy, 
California : ^ While chance seedlings spring up in fence comers aud similar 
places in conntries where there are summer rains, it is a rare occurrence in 
arid regions. This was brought to my notice forcibly this spring. In May 
and June our vineyard was filled with tens of thousands of little grape seed- 
lings, an inch or two high. They never grew much higher, and by July they 
had all perished. It is the same In our orchards. The five months of drought 
are too much for any seedling fruit, unless it is irrigated. As similar condi- 
tions of summer drought are prevalent over Arizona, New Mexico, and xmrts 
of Texan, it Is hardly probable that many chance seedling varieties will origi- 
nate within those limits." 


is found. The bush is taken to the garden and it is 
called — after the name of the town — the Dorchester. 
In another place, another form is discovered, and this, 
when transplanted, becomes known as the Lawton or 
New Rochelle. Another form is found on a prairie, 
and is called Western Triumph. Now and then one 
comes up about an old plantation, and is similarly 
cared for ; and rarely a man sows seeds and picks out 
a good variety from the seedlings ; and very rarely a 
man keeps a record of the parentage of the seed he 
sows ; and very, very rarely one makes crosses and 
sows the seeds therefrom. 

But while the new varieties are mostly discoveries, 
it does not follow that there is no skill represented in 
these novelties. The skill is shown in the recognition 
of a good thing, in giving the plants the very best of 
care when once they have been transferred to the 
garden ; and the force of this domestication is likely 
to express itself in better or more tractable ofFspring: 
in each generation. The tendency towards better- 
ment is constantly augmented by the habitual selec- 
tion of the best new forms. The tendency could be 
much more rapidly hastened if, in addition to select- 
ing the best seedlings which chance to appear, the 
operator should also select the seeds from the best 
plants with which to raise the seedlings. 

The reader may now want a specific account of 
just how a few prominent varieties of native fruits 
have originated. The old Cape or Alexander grape, 
which first introduced a successful viticulture into 
eastern America, was found wild in the woods in 
Pennsylvania, as we have seen. The Catawba, which 
is still a popular commercial variety, was found iu 


the woods in South Carolina in 1802. There are, no 
doubt, as good forms of the native fox -grape in the 
woods now as there were then, but we have now ob- 
tained a start in grape -growing, and we are no longer 
looking to the wild for our varieties. The fox -grape 
is known to be widely variable in its wild state, and I 
have this year obtained no less than half a dozen types 
of large and handsome wild fruits of it, varying from 
deep purple to amber- red. The Concord was a 
chance seedling in a Massachusetts garden, and it is 
supposed to have sprung from the wild fox -grape of 
the neighborhood. The Worden was raised from a 
seed of the Concord. The Delaware was found in the 
garden of a Frenchman in New Jersey, about fifty 
years ago, but its genesis is wholly unknown. It is 
probably a product of an accidental cross between the 
European grape — which the Frenchman cultivated — 
and some variety of native grape. The Brighton is 
the product of a hand cross between the Concord 
and the Diana-Hamburg (the latter itself a hybrid) 
by Jacob Moore, then of Brighton, N. Y. The Diana, 
which was a prominent variety for many years, 
was grown from a Catawba seed in Milton, Mass. 
Moore's Early was grown from a seed of the Concord. 
The Clinton came up where a handful of grape seed 
was sown at Hamilton College, Clinton, N. Y., and 
the old vine, now about seventy-five years old, is still 
growing on College Hill. The Norton's Virginia was 
found wild in 1835, near Richmond, Va. The Isabella 
was brought into the North early in the century. Its 
origin is wholly unknown, and has been the subject of 
much speculation. The botanical evidence shows that 
it is probably a native form of the fox -grape. All 


these specific illustrations of the origins of varieties 
are fairly t>T)ical for all native fruits. Most of the 
forms are random or chance discoveries, and they show 
that the natural tendency towards progressive variation 
in the indigenous fruit -species must be great, else the 
domesticated forms could not have reached their present 
state. If so much has been done by mere chance, — so 
far as the horticulturist is concerned,-^ there is certainly 
reason for believing that the rewards of plant -breeding 
must some day be great. 

What Probably Should be Done 

What has been done need not be done over again. 
That is, the best results at the amelioration of any 
species are to be expected by working with the highly 
improved forms rather than with the original wild 
stock. The quickest response to the plant -breeder is 
to be expected in those species which are already most 
ameliorated, and it is in these species, also, that the 
greatest efforts are needed, because they are the species 
which have the most useful qualities for man. One 
cannot specify how the native fruits ma}*^ be improved 
without going into the whole subject of the ameliora- 
tion of plants (a discussion of which I have already- 
made in my "Plant -Breeding"); but it may be use- 
ful to designate some of the things which seem to 
need to be done. 

In the first place, we need more varieties of every 
native fruit now cultivated — of grapes, raspberries, 
plums, cranberries, and the others. This is because 
new needs are always arising and the fruits are being 
grown in new regions, and new varieties are needed 


to adapt the species to these new wants. Those per- 
sons who are looking for the coming of the i)erfect, 
all-round variety, are behind the time, and are con- 
stantly getting farther behind, for it is more and 
more impossible to combine all the varied and contra- 
dictory specific desires of men into one plant form. 
There must be a best variety for every particular use 
and locality and soil. The cosmopolitan variety must 
become more and more restricted in range and useful- 
ness as time goes on, and as more refined and specific 
needs arise. People are always saying that we already 
have too many varieties and the effort is always mak- 
ing to reduce the number. Even the experimenters 
in the stations usually conceive it to be a part of 
their duty to endeavor to reduce the number of varie- 
ties, but what they are really doing — or might be 
doing — is determining the merits of varieties for 
specific uses. K a given variety does not satisfy 
the ideal of the experimenter, that fact is no proof 
that it may not satisfy the ideal of some one else, 
or that it may not be a positive acquisition in some 
other place or for some other purpose. We shall 
always need to test varieties, to be sure, and the 
testing must be more exact and personal the more 
critical we become in our demands. It is out of the 
many new varieties that we shall find the particular 
ones which we ourselves desire. 

In the second place, we need a greater range of 
variation, — more divergent and widely unlike varieties. 
These can be had by selecting out of the annually 
recurring batches of new varieties those which are 
widest unlike the existing types, providing, of course, 
they are worthy to be perpetuated. But they can be 


most surely obtained by raising seedlings from the 
most unlike types, and by the crossing of various 

In the third place, we need to secure more inci- 
dental or minor strains of the most popular and 
cosmopolitan varieties. The Concord grape, for ex- 
ample, is a most virile and useful type, and minor 
varieties of it — even if they were still called Concord — 
might adapt the variety more completely to some par- 
ticular purpose or locality. In many districts, for 
example, a Concord a week earlier or a week later 
than the standard variety, might be more useful than 
a variety* wholly new in kind. I introduce this class 
of facts to show that, while we need more varied types 
in our native fruits, we also need to increase the use- 
fulness of regnant types by inducing secondary vari- 
ations in them. There are two means of securing 
these minor variations. The surest means is to take 
cuttings or buds from those particular plants in our 
plantation which most nearly fit our purposes. In 
almost every large Concord vineyard, for example, 
there are some vines which are earlier or later, more 
or less productive, or otherwise different from the 
type. In many cases, the cuttings will perpetuate 
these differences. The second means of securing these 
incidental forms is by crossing between plants of the 
same variety. I am convinced that this type of plant- 
breeding is, in general, quite as useful as that of 
-crossing unlike varieties ; and after a wide range of 
variation has been secured and when men's ideals 
have become critical through education and business 
<;ompetition, it will be the more promising field. 

In the fourth place, it should be said that the 


greatest effort should be made to preserve or to 
intensify those desirable attributes which are charac- 
teristics of the wild species. Such attributes are 
likely to be more virile and permanent than similar 
ones which originate under domestication, because they 
have been impressed upon the species for a longer 
period of time. The intending plant -breeder can save 
himself much time and strength by throwing his 
efforts into line with the direction of evolution of 
the species rather than against it. He cannot afford 
even to be indifferent to the natural capabilities of 
the type. For example, other things being equal, the 
domesticator will generally have better results in breed- 
ing plants for a dry region by selecting those types 
which naturally grow in such regions. The adapting 
of the grape to limestone soils can no doubt be 
quicker accomplished by endeavoring to breed up 
acceptable varieties from Vitis Berlandieri, which 
thrives in these lands, than by attempting to over- 
come the pronounced antipathies of the Vitis Lahrusca 
tyx)es to such soils. The first attempt, in impressing 
new fruit -species into cultivation, should be to secure 
a type which will thrive in the given region ; the pro- 
duction of ameliorated varieties is a secondary and 
usually much simpler matter. The first consideration 
in breeding plums for the dry plains regions, for 
example, is to secure a type which will endure the 
climate, — the long droughts, the severe winters, the 
hot summers. This fundamental desideratum may be 
expected to be found in the indigenous plums, rather 
than in the domesticated types. This is saying that 
one of the most promising lines of effort in the im- 
provement of the native fruits is to work with the 


species which are indigenous to the locality, if they 
possess coveted features and if they are naturally 

All this means, what I have already said, that 
there shoold be a general improvement all along the 
line in our native fruits, the same as there should be 
in any other fruits ; and the greatest improvement 
is needed in those very types which are already most 
improved. In other words, we need more to augment 
the amelioration of tyi)es already domesticated, than 
we do to introduce wholly new types, although this 
latter enterprise is also of great importance. The 
new types may be expected to come into use as the 
demand for them arises, and they will come in 
gradually, and obscurely at first, as the other types 
have come. 

The grape, in my estimation, needs the first and 
the greatest attention. The types which we grow are 
yet much inferior to the Old World types. Our com- 
mercial varieties — as the Concord, Worden, Catawba, 
Niagara, Norton's Virginia — are generalized types, 
and the market is now overrun with general -purpose 
grapes. We shall soon be driven into specializations 
in grapes, as people have been in older countries, and 
special varieties will then be needed. Aside from 
the further improvement of the domesticated native 
species, we are now being driven — by the settlement 
of the South and West — to the improvement of other 
species, like Vitis Linsecomii, Vitis Champinij and the 
like. The second greatest need is in the development 
of our native plum flora ; the third is in the further 
evolution of the brambles, as the raspberries, black- 
berries and dewberries ; the fourth is in the amalga- 



mation of the western crabs with the domestic apples, 
for the plains and the northwest. Beyond these four 
emphatic needs, I think that there are none which 
stand out clearly and unmistakably above all others, 
although there are a score of native fruit -types which 
are crying for attention. Among them may be men- 
tioned the chestnuts, pecans, gooseberries, currants, 
cranberries, huckleberries, juneberries, cherries, mul- 
berries, elderberries, and all the tribes of hickory nuts 
and walnuts. 

The stimulus, or raison d^etre^ of the improvement 
of native fruits will be the increasing demands made 
by a complex civilization ; and the actual work of 
improvement will be done by a few patient souls 
whose love of the work far outruns desire for 
applause and for pecuniary reward. 



Acorns 445 

AdftmB,B. F 837,338 

— H.C 337 

— Proat «0 

Adliim. John.. . .43, 40, 60, 57. 61, 96, 449 

— book by 118 

Adlomia 51 

Affleck, Thos 65 

Alton, on pronos 184, 185 

— onmbns 366,367 

Alaska, berries in 888 

Albansh, B. F 332,334 

AlbertsonA Hobbs 177 

Alexander, Hr '. 43 

Allen, John Flsk 70 

— J. P., book by 118 

— L. F 286 

— Walter B 392 

Amatis, Mr 138 

Amelanchier alnifolia 406 

— Botryapinm 406 

— oblongifolia 406 

Americana plums 182 

Ammen, Father 96 

Andrae, E. H., bookby 118 

Anona glabra 442 

-laurifolla 442 

Anonas *, . . . .441 

Antm. Edward 16 

Apples, native 249, 450, 461 

ArctostaphyloB alpina 889 

Asimina triloba 443,444 

Aster spectabilis 416 

Aoicbinbansh dewberry 354 

Austin, C. P 288 

-J. W 845 

— dewberry 844 

Bailey, L. H., books by 118 

quoted 203.221,222,447 

— A Hanford 350 


Bake-apple bony 365,387 

Balch. D.M 56 

Barber, Mrs.C 60 

Barry, quoted 392 

Bartel,Dr 335.830,350 

— dewberry 335.846 

Bartle8,T. C 836.839 

Bartram, Isaac 433 

— Moses, on silk worm 141 

— William 5.8,46 

Bassett,Wm. F 214 

Bassler, Thomas 207 

Batt,auoted 7 

Bauer's nursery 852 

Beach, Solomon 66 

— S.A 306 

— plums 214 

Bear berries 889 

Beardslee, Mr 323 

Bechtel's crab 281 

Beck, Professor 867 

Beech nut 445 

Berckmans, P. J ......1^, 213 

Berkeley, William 134 

Berries, various 386 

Bessey, quoted 226, 235, 239, 242 

Beverley, Robert, quoted..6, 6, 11, 12, 134 

Bigelow, on rubus 360 

BUberries 387 

Blackberries, synopsis of 877 

Blackberry history 298 

— mentioned 451, 453, 461 

Blackcap 289 

Blackman, Dr 202 

Black-rot 88,90,95 

Blueberries 887,889,416 

Bocen,Mr 65 

Bolzins, John Martin 137 

BonoaU, silkraUing 128 

Books on crapes...... 118 





Books on mulberries 155 

Bordeaux mixture 96 

Bostwick. Wm 68 

Bradford, mentioned 170 

Brainard. G. W. 412 

Brandt, D 412 

Bright, William, book hj 118 

Brighton grape 71, 455 

Brinckl6,Wm. D 283,284 

Britton, quoted 103, 323, 352, 367 

Brockett, quoted 141, 149 

Brown, Robert 250 

Broyles, M. W 348 

Bryant, William Cullen 440 

Buchanan. Rob't 47. 63. 65, 86, 96 

book by 110 

Buckhout on Chestnuts .447 

Budd. Professor 241. 264, 410 

Buffalo-berry 406,452 

— currant 401 

Bulst, Robert 283,284 

Bull, E.W 72,73 

— grape 98 

BuUace grape 98 

Bullit grape 98 

Bunch berries 380 

Bundy, Jos 179 

Burbank, Luther 216, 217 

Bush & Son & Meissner 92 

book by 119 

Busby, Jas., book by 119 

Butternuts 445 

California, grapes in 87, 89 

Cape Cod cranberries 414 

Cape grape 40, 42, 61 

Card, F. W 228,230,283, 

201, 294, 298, 326, 346, 351, 371, 889 

Carex striata 416 

Carman, E. 8 326 

Carolina, silk in 134 

Carroll, of Carrollton 23 

Cartier, Jacques 170 

Catawba « 50, 455 

Cerasus borealis 193 

Chamisso & Schlechtendal 352 

Chandler, E. H. .435 

Charlton, Wm.. books by 119, 120 

Cherries, dwarf 233 

— mentioned 171, 174, 452, 461 


Cherries, native 226 

Chestnuts discussed .445 

— mentioned 170. 445, 4411 

Chickasaw pliuns 191 

Childs, John Lewis 328 

Chilian strawberry 427 

China, mulberries in 12S 

Choke cherry 227,228, 230 

Churchill. J. R 323 

Cider from crabs 259 

Cincinnati, horticulture in ... .63, 65, Bfi 

Cist, quoted 63, 05 

Clapp, Aaron, book by 155 

Clark, Mrs. Charity 202 

Clarke, John, book by 155 

Cliuate on plums 190 

Clinton grape 77,102,455 

Cloudberry 864, 387 

Clusius, quoted 210, 211 

Cobb, Jonathan H 143, 144, 149 

book by 155 

Cole, quoted 392 

Collins, John *S 314 

Compass cherry 244 

Comstock, F. G., book by .156 

Concord grape 72, 455, 457, 458 

Congress on silk raising .... 142 et seq. 

Connecticut, silk in 138 et seq. 

Cook, Dewain 341, 343 

Cope, F.J 120 

Corbett, Professor 407 

Comean, J. A 65 

Cornell, Wm.T 68 

Comus Canadensis 389 

— Suecica 389 

Crab-apples 249,450,461 

Craig, quoted 230 

Cranberry, high-bush 412 

— mentioned 70, 388, 451, 461 

— sketch of 414 

Crandall, R. W 401 

— currant 401, 452 

CratSBgus cordata 445,446 

Crehore, Mrs. Diana 70 

Crowberries .888 

Crozier, quoted 283 

Curlew-berries 387 

Currants in Massachusetts 13 

— mentioned 170, 887. 888, 461 




Cnrrant, sketch of 309 

Custard- apple 441 

Cynthiasa grape 80 

Cutter. EliauH 120 

Damsons 174 

Date plum 434 

Davis. Chas. A 185 

Davy, General 55 

Dawson, Jackson 233 

Deane. Walter 323 

De Bemeaud, book by 120 

De Caradeuo. A 212 

DeHarzi 143.157 

Delauriere. Mrs 262 

Delaware grape 71 

De Lyon, Abraham 14 

Dennis. Jonathan, book by 166 

Dennlston. 6., book by 120 

Dent. Mrs. H 60 

Desfontaine 255 

Dewberries, sketch of 330 

— synopsis of 371 

Dewberry, mentioned. . .70, 388, 380. 461 
Dewey, Dr 425 

— D. M 340,350 

— LysterH 207 

Diamond grape 71 

Diana grape 70, 455 

Dieck, mentioned 244 

Diospyros Virginiana 433, 440 

Dodd,Wimam 175 

Doolittle, H. H 282 

Dore, Andrew 16 

Douglas, on pyrus 250 

Douglas, on rubus 354 

Downer. J. S 176. 177 

Downing. Charles 168, 285. 300, 300, 

302. 383. 384. 443 

— mulberry 168 

Downing's** Fruits and Fruit Trees," 

l&l, 105, 175, 212, 263 

Drake, quoted 138 

Du Breuil, book by 120 

Dufour family 23, 448 

— John James 21 et seq., 83. 86 

book by 120 

Duf onr's first experiment 21 

— second experiment 88 

Dnponcean, book by 156 


Dwarf cherries 233 

Dwight, Timothy 424 

Eastwood, book by 414 

Eckelberger, Thos 48 

Ehrhart, quoted 210 

Eisen, Gustav, book by 121 

Elderberry, mentioned 388, 410, 481 

Eley, Charles N 213 

Eliot, Jared 138,130,140 

— John 426 

Elkins. Thomas 165 

Elliott, F. R 65 

Empetrum nigrum 388 

Engelman. Dr 83 

— quoted 104 

Ennis A Patten 181 

Evans. W.H 388 

Everbearing raspberry 278 

Fay, Lincoln 73 

Ferrar, John 132 

Fessenden, T. G., book by 156 

Filberts 170 

Fisher, book by 121 

Fitch, Dr. Asa 81 

FitzA, C. G 213 

Flagg, Wm. J., book by 121 

Florida, grapes in 3, 8 

Ford & Son 401,411 

Fox, the name 5 

Fox-grape, 88. See, also, Vitis La- 

Fragarla Americana 425, 430, 431 

— bracteata 431 

— Califomica 432 

— Canadensis 428 

-Chiloensis 388,431,432 

— elatior 425 

— glauca 432 

— lUinoensis 428 

— lowensis 428 

— Mexlcana 430 

-veaca 425,430 

— Virginiana 428 

Fugger, Mr...'. 60 

Fuller, A. S 84,238,286,287. 

288, 285, 302. 314. 321. 447 

book by 121 

-G.W 343 

Gale, £ 222 





Galloway. B. T M 

Gattinger, Dr 252 

Gaultheria Shallon 389 

Geer dewberry 344 

General Grant dewberry 348 

Georgeson, qaoted 438 

Georgia, grapes In 13 

— silk In 134 et seq. 

Geyer, mentioned 238 

Gibbs, Mrs. Isabella 66 

Glllet. Felix 167 

Gipson, quoted 238 

Goff, quoted 226,337,340 

Goessmann, C. A., book by 121 

Goodrich, quoted 290 

Gooseberries, mentioned.. .387, 450, 461 

Gooseberry, sketch of 389 

Gould. Dr ; 420 

Grant, C. W., book by 121 

Grapes, amelioration 449. 454, 456 

— species of 98 

Gray's Synoptical Flora 98 

Green, Chas. A 348 

-Professor 230,240,243 

Grein, Mr 79 

Grindon. quoted 298 

Hadley. on persimmon 433 

Hale. Edward Everett, quoted 2 

— Elisha 180 

Hall, mentioned 207 

Haraszthy. A., book by 121 

Hare, Thomas 180 

Harris. J. S 205,270.341,343 

Hartley, Thos 60 

Hartlib, Samuel 130 

Harvey, James 176 

Haskell, George 70 

book by 121,122 

Hastings. Wm 68 

Hawkins, John 3 

Haws, mentioned 170 

Hazelrigg, Wm 27 

Hazels 445 

Heldeman. C. W. H 244 

Heikes. W. P 177 

Heinrichs. Mr 78 

Heller, A 431 

Henry, Mrs. J. W 60 

Herbemont grape 77 


Herbemont. Nicholas 16. 67, 7B 

Hermann, Mo 6D, 87 

Hickories 445.461 

Hicks mulberry 165 

Higginson. Francis, quoted . .2, 162, 170 

High-bush blackberry 305. 379 

Hill. E. J 117 

Hoare. C, book by 122 

Hofer. A. P., book by 122 

Hogg. Robert 278.208 

Holcomb, £. A. ....■•.•... .302 

Homergue, John 146. 156 

Hooper, E.J 63.65 

Horticola 122 

Hortulana plums 194 

(See. also. Prnnus hortulana. ) 

Houghton, Abel 390. 392 

Hovey.C. M 168 

Howarth, Mr 278 

Huckleberries, mentioned 170. 387. 

388. 416, 451 

Hudson river, grapes on, 68 

Huguenots 13 

Hurtleberries 387 

Husmann, Ctoo 60,78,80 

books by 122 

Hybrid apples 266,272 

— blackberries 315, 317. 321. 326. 


— cherty 244 

— raspberries 288 

Hybrids in grapes 70 

Indiana, grapes in 84 

Isabella grape 66.455 

Ives. John M 391 

Jackson, General 175 

Jaeger. Hermann 70 

Japanese persimmon ..... .437, 438. 441 

— plum 248 

James Land silk-raising 128, 133 

Jefferson 23 

Jepson, W. L. Ill 

Jermy, G 267 

Johnson, J. E 245 

-S. W 18 

— mulberry 164 

Jones, Hist, of Georgia. .14, 135, 136, 138 

Joslyn, Leander 282 

Josselyn, John 174 




Julien, Stanislas, book by 157 

Junebeny 404, 452, 461 

Kaki 437,438,441 

Kalm, Peter 163,823 

Kaskaskia 3. 23 

Keffer, Chas. A 239 

Kehr, Mr 78 

Kenrick, WiUiam 148, 157, 

301, 368, 300 

Kentucky, grapes in 22 et seq. 

Kem.G. M 65 

Kerr,J. W...» 202,213,215,222 

Keuka Lake 67 

Kirtland, Professor 164 

Klein &Ck) 237 

Kuesheneka 388 

KniiBn. Wm 68 

Knudson, H 231, 244 

Knndsen, Mr 05 

Kofoid, Chas. A 323,324 

Kunth, quoted 166 

Labrador, berries in 387 

LsBstadiaBidwellii 88 

Lambricger, Messrs 406 

Lampasas mulberry 166 

Langendoerfer, Mr 79 

Lnrdner, Dionysius, book by 137 

Laspeyre, Bernard 66 

Legaux, Peter 19. 25, 42, 44, 48 

Leif, son of Eric 2 

Lemmon, J. 216 

Lemosq, F. A 78 

Lilly, A. T 153 

Lindheimer 207 

Llndley, N.H 169 

Link, herbarium of 367 

Linnaeus, on rubus 323, 366, 367 

Lodeman, on grai>e fungi 90 

Logan, J. H 358 

Logan-berry 357 

Loiseleur-Deslongchamps 210 

Lombe, Sir Thomas 136 

London Company 10, 11, 127, 133 

Longworth, N. . .20, 47, 54, 61, 62, 65, 67, 
78, 79, 96, 276, 278, 279, 286, 295, 443 

book by 123 

Lord. O.M 179,180 

Loubat, Alphonse 20, 94, 96 

book by 123 

Lovett, Josiah 290, 390 

— J.T 326,406 

Lucretia dewberry 332, 346, 373 

Lucretia's Sister dewberry 344 

Lukens, General 60 

Lyon, T. T 349 

Maclay, Wm 60 

Macoun, J. M 364 

Maine, grapes in 13 

Makepeace, A. D 417, 420, 421, 423 

Malus angustifolia 256 

— coronaria. 256 

— sempervirens 255 

Mammoth dewberry 348 

Mann, herbarium of 267 

Manning, quoted 390 

Marianna plum 208 

Markley.E 181 

Marmalade 174 

Marshall, Humphrey.. 182, 185, 191. 195 

Marsh berries 387 

Mason, S.C 221 

Massachusetts Company 12 

Mathews, B. A 270,396 

Maurick, Samuel 49, 50 

Mayes dewberry 344 

-John 344 

Maynard dewberry 346, 347 

McMahon 25,42,274 

McMinn.J. M 123 

McMurtrie, Wra., book by 123 

McQuery, George 31 

Mead, P. B., book by 123 

Mererod family 27, 38 

Mlchaux, on prunus 193 

— quoted 28, 150, 102. 

256, 284, 367, 412, 429 

Mifflin, Qoyemor 61 

Mildew 88, 90 

MUlardet 90. 96 

Miller, Anthony 95 

-Phillip 412 

Millspaugh, C. F 322 

Miner, Mr 142 

— on dewberries 332 

— on plums 175 

Missouri currant 401 

— grapes in 60, 87 

Mitzky. book by 123 




Mohr, F.,bookby 123 

Molka berry 3W 

Monilia fractlgena 223 

Moore, Jacob 70, 71. 455 

Morin, M., book by 157 

Morong berry 388 

Morton, Thomas, quoted 2, 170 

Moras alba 161.167,168,109 

— celtidif olla 108 

— Japonlea 160 

— multicaalis 148, 140, 150, 153, 168 

-nigra 161.167 

-rubra 160.161,164 

— Tatarica 161 

— tomentosa 166 

Mosher, S 65 

Mottler, Mr 65 

Muench. F., book by 123 

Mulberries, history of 127 et sea. 

— mentioned 450, 461 

Mulberry trees mentioned 4, 170 

— varieties of 164, 105, 166, 168. 160 

Multicaulis craze 141 et seq. 

Munson, T. V 70, 71, 81, 83. 85, 114, 

117. 166, 206. 207 

book by 123 

Muscadine grape 83, 08 

Myrobalan plum 200 

Nantes, edict of 13 

Never Pail dewberry 348 

New England, grapes in 2 

New Jersey, grapes in 16 

New York, grapes in 16, 67, 87 

NichoUs, Governor 16 

Nicholson, Professor 60 

Nicollet's expedition 238 

Northmen 3 

i^OrtOn, Urn Mataa.a. ••••••••••••••.•• (O 

Norton's Virginia 69, 78, 455 

Noyes, Professor 77 

Nut-fruits 445,451 

Nut-pine 445 

Nuttall's herbarium 43 

Oglethorpe and silk 136 

Ohio, grapes 24 

Onderdonk, George 177 

Oregon crab 249 

Oregon Everbearing blackberry 360 

Otis Ashmore 135 


Pale, Tenia 5 

Parker, E. and C 131 

Parmentler. Mr 04 

Parry. 0.0 238 

— William 301, 314 

Pascalls, Felix.... 150, 157 

Patten, G.G 272 

Pawpaw 443.444 

Pear-berries 387 

Pecan 445,461 

Peel, painting by 61 

Penn. Governor 43 

— William 16 

Pennoek. Chas. £ 237, 241 

Pepys, Qnoted 6 

Peronospora viticola 88 

Perrottet 148 

Persia, mulberries in 128 

Persimmon, sketch of. 438 

Persimmons, mentioned 172 

Persoz, book by 124 

Phelps, R. H., book by 121 

Philippines 120 

Phin, J no. , books by 124 

Phylloxera 88.91 

Pickering, Colonel 61 

Picket, Heathcoat 38 

Pickett, J. Q 343 

— Mr 176 

Pine, nut 415 

Place, J. A 75 

Planchon 00 

— Quoted 103 

Plantagenet, Beauchamp 4 

Plums, mentioned 170, 171. 452, 461 

— sketch of nOetseq. 

Poeschel, Mr 70 

Poetry, on silk-worm 132 

PomegranatM 13 

Pond apple 441.442 

Porter, Professor 226, 311, 370, 430 

Potatoes 13 

Potlatch 389 

Powell, E.P T7 

Prentiss. A. N., book by 124 

Priestly. Dr. Jos 00 

Prillieux 91 

Prince. William 163,301 



Prince, Wm. R..66, 80, 274, 275, 276. 429 

— book by 124 

Provost, Paul H 71 

Pmniu AUeghanlensis 226 

— Americana 173. 182, 183, 184, 185, 

186, 187, 188, 180. 100, 101, 108, 
100, 204. 205. 207, 224, 225, 243, 244 

— angoBtifolia 101.103,108, 

201, 204, 205, 220 

— australiB 180 

— Besseyi 221, 235, 236, 237, 241, 


— ceraaifera 210,211,213 

— ChamflBcerasns 235 

— Chicasa 103 

— demissa 231 

— domestica 210, 211, 215 

— glandnloaa 207 

— gracilis 221 

— Gravesil 214 

— hortolana 103. 105, 106, 107, 108, 

100, 201, 203, 204, 208. 244 

— injnennda 225 

— maritima 103, 211,214 

— Mississippi 105 

— myrobalana 210 

— nigra 184, 185. 188. 187, 188, 180 

— Padus 227,228 

— Pennsylvanica 233 

— Pissardl 211,213 

— pnmila 2M, 235, 237, 238 

— rivularis 207,208,223 

— serotina 230.232 

— sphaerocarpa 103 

— stenopliyllns 103 

— subcordata 215, 216 

— Texana 184.224 

— nmbellata 200,224,225 

— Utahensis 244 

— Virginiana 227,228,231 

— Watsoni 218,220,221,222, 


Pnliein, Samuel 140 

Purcell, J. B 64,278 

Purdy's «Pruit Recorder" 164. 

835, 836, 338 

Pnrry, Jean Pierre 8 

Pursh, Frederick 142,413 

Pyms baccata 272 I 


Pyrus angnstif olia 251, 252, 


— coronaria..251, 252, 253, 254, 255 256, 

257, 258, 250. 265, 266. 267. 272 

— loensis 256,258,250.260,261. 


— Mains 268,272 

— pmnifolia 272 

— rivularis 250 

— Sonlardi 266,268,260,272 

Quinces 174 

Rafinesqne, book by 125 

— on mbus 367 

— quoted 48,62,86 

Ragland. A. M 344 

Raleigh, Sir Walter 83 

Ramsey, F. M 166 

— P. T 222,223 

Rand, E. L 363 

— A Redfleld 363 

Rand's blackberry 363, 885 

Raspberries, mentioned 170. 887, 

389, 450, 461 

Raspberry, Everbearing 279 

Raspberry history 274 

Rathbun, Al vln F 321 

Raymond, H. C 180 

Ravaz andViala 00 

Reasoner Bros 352 

Reemelin, Chas 65 

book by 125 

Rehfuss. L 65 

Ribos Americanum 401 

— aureum 401 

— Cynosbati 306 

— Orossularia 804, 306 

— laziflorum 888 

— nigrum 300 

— oxyaeanthoides 304, 806 

— rubrum 388,309 

— sanguineum 401 

Ricard, Mr 00 

Rice, J. B 177 

Richards, Paul 16 

Richards, book by 414 

Ricketts, J.H 70 

Rittenhouse, fienj 61 

Robbins, J. W 323 

Roberts, Edward P., book by 158 



Robinson. J. H 177 

— Pickering 138 

Rogers, B. 8 70 

Rommel. Jaoob 09. 79 

Root-house 80 

Rose, Simri 165 

Rubus AUegheniensis 312, 370. 381 

— Americanus 275,288 

— angnlatos 367 

— arctlcns 365 

— arcntns 311, 367, 368, 370, 377 

description of 381 

— BaUeyanns 331, 352, 368. 371. 375 

— MBslus 868 

— Canadensis 276, 823, 339, 340, 

341, 342. 366. 887. 368. 370. 371. 374 
description of 385 

— Chamiemoras 364. 365, 387. 389 

— cuneifolius 325, 326 

description of 378 

— Enslenii 332, 352. 853. 368, 371 

description of 375. 376 

— flacellaris 368,300 

— floridus 868,370,382,886 

— frondosns 367,370.381 

— fmticosns 208.360 

— heterophyllos 371 

— hispidus 330. 340. 360. 362. 363 

description of 377 

— hnmifnsus 332. 352, 353, 371, 375 

— IdaBns..274, 283. 287, 288, 293, 204, 357 

— inermis 367 

— invisus 346,848,371.375 

description of 374 

— laciniatus 380 

— leucodermis 280 

— macropetalns 354 

— Mlllspanehii 323. 867. 370, 385 

— montanus 381 

— neglectns 288. 289. 201, 294, 295 

— nigrobaccns 800, 370, 381. 385 

description of 379 

— nitidus 367 

— N at kanns 297 

— occidentallB 287,288.289 

— odoratos.. 297 

— parviflonxs 389 

— Pennsylvanicas tTTC, 288 

— prooambens 368 


Rubns setosns 300.361, 382 

description of 377 

— spectabilis 388 

— stellatos 388, 389 

— BtrigosQS 288. 289, 291. 

292. 293. 294. 389 

— subereetns 368, 370, 381 

— trivialis 330. 340. 345. 352, 368, 373 

description of 376 

— nlmifolins 367 

— nrsinus 353,354, 350 

— Tlllosus. . . .306, 311, 312. 339. 340. 341, 

842. 344. 346. 347. 848. 350. 351. 353. 

363, 366, 367. 370, 371. 376. 370, 881, 385 

description of 371 

— vitifolins 352. 354. 855, 356, 380 

Rnsh. BenJ 60 

— Richard 143, 157 

Salal berries .....389 

Salmon-berry 207, 388 

Sambncos Canadensis 411 

— racemosa 389 

Sand blackberry 325,378 

— cherry 234 

— plnm 218 

Sargent, C. S 166. 184. 186. 109. 218* 

220. 221. 224. 226, 250, 259, 447 

Saunders, Wm., book by 125 

Sayers, Edward 65 

Scheele, quoted 207,223, 224 

SchoU. Mrs 53. 55 

Scuppemong 83. 85, 90 

Seacor, Lewis A 90S 

Seals of Georgia 135 

Sharp, Elder 154 

Shellbarks 445 

Shepherdia argentea 406 

Shinn, C. H 201.297,354.357 

Sias.A. W 343 

Siebenthal family 27 

Siedhof. Chas I25 

Silk-growing 127 et seq. 

Silk-worms 127. 130. 141 

Simmon beer 437. 438 

Sisson. plum of 216 

SmaU.JohnK 214.225 

Small nuts, mentioned 170 

Smith. Gideon B 150 

— John B 414 



Smith, John, quoted. .4, 163, 172, 173. 240 

— John Jay 284 

Snow, Geo. C 68 

Salzbnrgera 137 

Soalard, James G 175. 261, 270 

Sonlard crab 261 

Southampton, Earl of 10, 128 

South Carolina, grapes in 8, 13, 16 

Species of grapes 08 

Speer, R. P 410 

Spooner, A., book by 125 

— quoted 26,66, 04 

Squash-berries 387 

Stark Bros 177 

Stebbins, Dr 151 

Stephen, Peter 156 

Stephens, Wm., quoted 14 

Sterling, John 321 

Stevens, Wm. Baoon 14, 134 

SlUes.Rev 140 

Stone, G.E 424 

-I.N 337,838,330 

Strachey, William 162, 172, 240 

Strauch, Adolph 65 

Strawberries, mentioned... 386, 380, 450 

(See, also, Fragaria.) 

Strawberry, sketch of 424 

Stroebel, P. A 137 

Strong, W. C 75 

— W. C, bookby 125 

Stubbs, JohnM 165 

— mulberry 165 

gwett, Frank T 453 

Synopsis of vitis 08 

Tawakong plum 207, 223 

Tea-berries 387 

Teas, E. Y 335 

Terminalia 200 

Thayer, Eliphalet 300. 302 

Thlmble-berry 280, 380 

Thorn-apples 443 

mentioned 170 

Thomless blackberry 322, 385 

Thurber, Professor 238 

Tobacco, and silk 134 

Tomes, Robert, book by 125 

Torrey & Gray 211,255,360 

— quoted 352 

Toumefort, quoted 210 


Tracy. S.M 238 

Trasker's grape 43 

Trattinnlck 388 

Treaekleberries 387 

Treedway, J. B 344 

Troop, on persimmon 433 

Tryon, J. H., book by 125 

Tyrker 2 

Uber, 0. A 352 

Utah hybrid cherry 221, 244 

Uvedale 4 

Vacoinium macrocarpon 414, 424 

— ovalifolium 380 

— Oxyeoccus 380 

— parviflorum 380 

— uliginosum 388 

— Vitis-Id»a 388,424 

Van Buren, J 85 

Van Deman, H. E 404 

Van Dusen, Hiram 281 

Vernon, Wm. H., book by 158 

Vevay 84 

Viala and Ravaz 00 

Viburnum Americanum 412 

— edule 413 

— Opulus 412 

— Oxy coceos 4 13 

— paociflorum . .•. 388 

Vick's Sons 321 

Virginia, grapes in 4, 6, 11 

— mulberries In 128, 120 

— plums in 174 

Vitis lestivalis 81, 82, 83, 86, 08, 112 

— Arizonica 100 

— Baileyana 107 

— Berlandieri 101. 105, 108, 450 

— bicolor 114 

— Bourquiniaua 81, 83, 114 

— Califomica 110,111 

— campestris 8 

— candicans 115 

— Caribaea 100,115 

— Champini 105,106,460 

— cinerea 43, 108 

— cordlfolia 02.103,106 

— coriacea 116 

— Doaniana 112 

— Glrdiana HI 

— Linsecomii 113,450,460 



Yitls LabnucA . . .5, 6. 43. 55. 67. 06, 75. 

83, 86. 08. 102. 116 

— Longll 104 

— znonticola 101 

— Mnnsoniana 00 

— Nuevo-Mezicana 104 

— IMtlmata 105 

— rilMiria 60, 75, 76. 02. 101. 102 

— rotnndlfolla 83. 81. 86, 08, 00 

— rtipeatrls 100 

— Slmpaoxd 116 

— Solonls 10* 

— sylvestris 47 

— Treleasei 103 

— vinlfera 0. 47, 83, 80, 00, 08 

— vulplna 60, 75, 76. 86. 02. 101 

— species of 08 

Wait. F. E.,book by 125 

Walnuts, mentioned 170, 445, 461 

Warder, John A 65 

book by 126 

Washington thorn 445, 446 

Watson, Sereno 211, 227 

Waugh, F. A.. .180, 203, 205. 220, 226, 227 

Wayland, H. B 177 

Weaver, Mr 181 

Webb, book by 414 

Weller, Sidney 85 

Werk,Mr 65 

Worden grape 75, 455 

— Schuyler 74, 76 

White, Hugh 75 


White, book by 414 

Whitmarsh. Dr 151, 158 

Whortleberries 170.387.388,416 

Wickson, quoted 167.217,231, 

2j0. 201. 297. 356 

Wilder. Marshall P 300 

Wiedersprecker. Mr 78 

Wier, D. B 175.264 

Wllldenow, onpyros 273 

— on mbos 387, 368 

Willams. Edward 128.129 

Williams James S 314 

— Roger 426 

— on dewberry 332 

Williamson. John 65 

Wilson. John 314 

— Samnel 352,854 

Windom dewberry 341 

Wine berries 389 

Winslow. Edward, quoted.... 2, 170, 171 

Winsor, Justin, quoted 2, 128 

Wintergreen 387 

Winthrop, Oovemor 3, 12 

Wolf. D. B 179 

— collections of 207 

Wood. A., cited 250, 259 

— William 171.380.426 

Woodward, book by 126 

Wright. F.L 344,348 

Wylle, Dr. Peter 85 

Yeatman.T. H 65 

Young, Alexander 171 

The Best and Newest 
Rural Books 

TWO series of books on leading topics con- 
nected with agricultural and rural life are here 
mentioned. Each book is the work of a 
specialist, under the editorial supervision of Pro- 
fessor L. H. Bailey, of the Cornell University, and 
is readable, clear-cut and practical. 


Inclades books which state the underlying principles of agri- 
culture in plain language. They are suitable for consultation 
alike by the amateur or professional tiller of the soil, the 
scientist or the student, and are freely illustrated and finely 

The following volumes are now ready: 

THE SOIL. B7 F. H. Kikq, of the University of Wisconsin. 303 pp. 75 ets 

THE FERTILITY OF THE LAND. B7 I. P. Roberts, of Cornell Univer 
sity. 440 pp. $1.25. 

THE SPRAYING OP PLANTS. By £. 6. Lodbman. late of Cornell Uni 
versity. 309 pp. $1. 

MILK AND ITS PRODUCTS. By H. H. Wing, of Cornell University 
280 pp. $1. 

THE PRINCIPLES OF FRUIT-GROWING. By L. H. Bailxt. 520 pp. $1.25 

BUSH FRUITS. By F. W. Card, of Rhode Island College of Agrlcnltnre 
and Mechanic Arts. 527 pp. $1.25. 

New volumes will be added from time to time to the 
Rural Science Series. The following are in preparation: 

PHYSIOLOGY OF PLANTS. By J. C. Arthur, Purdue University. 

Yale University. 

PLANT PATHOLOGY. By B. T. Gallowat and assoeiates of U. S. Depart- 
ment of Agriculture. 

SEEDS AND SEED-GROWING. By G. H. H1CK8, of U. S. Dept. of Agr. 


HiLOABD, of University of California. 
FEEDING OF ANIMALS. By W. H. Jordan, of New York State Expert 

ment Station. 
IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE. By F. H. King, University of Wisconsin 
FERTILIZERS. By E. B. VooRHXKS. of New Jersey Expertment SUtion. 
RURAL WEALTH AND WELFARE. By Gkokox T. Faibchiu). Ex-Presi 

dent of the Agricultural College of Kansas. 
FARM POULTRY. By Gkorqr C. Watson, of Pennsylvania State College 


THE SOIL. Its Nature, Relations and 
Fundamental Principles of Management. 

By F. H. KING, Professor of Agricultural Physics 
in the University of Wisconsin. 

A luminous and practical discussion of the soil 
and its various attributes. As an understanding of 
the soil in some measure is of vital necessity to 
success in even the most limited agricultural opera- 
tions, the importance of a work like this cannot 
easily be overestimated. The progressive farmer will 
be greatly helped by a thoughtful perusal of this 
unique book, which has received the warmest appro- 
bation of teachers and farmers in all parts of the 

The Soil comprise^ an introduction, which discusses the mak* 
ing of soils by natural ag^encies ; and chapters follow on the nature, 
functions, origin and wasting of soils; texture, composition and 
kinds of soils; nitrogen of the soil; capillarity, solution, diifusion, 
and osmosis; soil water; conservation of soil moisture; distribu- 
tion of roots in the soil; soil temperature; relations of air to the 
soil; farm drainage; irrigation; physical effects of tillage and 

"I consider it a most desirable addition to oar affricultaral literature, 
and a distinct advance over previous treatises on the same subject, not 
only for popular use, but also for students and specialists, who will find 
many new and useful suggestions therein." 


Director of AgrieuUunU Bs^;>€riment StalUni, 

Berkeley. Cal. 

**It is a book which progressive farmers will come to regard as one 
of the essential implements of farm life. "—Boston Daily Advertiser. 

**The manual is brief, accurate, comprehensive, and hits the practical 
point every time." — Independent. 


Summary Sketch of the Relationship of 
Farm-Practice to the Maintaining and In- 
creasing of the Productivity of the Soil. 

By I. P ROBERTS, Director of the College of Agri- 
culture, Cornell University. 


This work, writtea by one who has been termed 
"the wisest farmer in America," takes up the treat- 
ment of the soil from the standpoint of the farmer 
rather than that of the scientist. It embodies the 
results of years of careful experimentation and obser- 
vation along practical lines, and will be found help- 
ful and insphing to a marked degree. No other one 
book could be so heartily recommended to the pro- 
gressive farmer, on subjects of vital interest to him, 
as this fresh and interesting series of talks — for Pro- 
fessor Roberts seems to be personally addressing the 

The Fbrtilitt of the Land Inclades A Chat with the Young 
Farmer ; Inventory of the Land ; Erolation of the Plow (fully illus- 
trated) ; The Means and Philosophy of Tilling the Land (telling how 
and why we should plow, harrow, etc. ) ; ConserTlng Moisture ; Irri- 
gation and Drainage ; Manures (in four unique, illustrated chap- 
ters); Nitrogen; Potash and Phosphoric Acid; Lime and other 
dressing? ; Commercial Fertilisers ; The Use of Clovers, Fallows 
and Rotations ; Appendix. 

" In short, the book will be foand helpful to the fanner, in that it will 
enable him to go throngh the routine of his everyday work with intelli- 
gence, and, therefore, with skill and the assorance of wider snoeess."— 
Garden and Forest. 




Succinct Account of the History, Principles 
and Practice of the Application of Liquids 
and Powders to Plants for the Purpose of 
Destroying Insects and Fungi. By E. G. 

LODEMAN, late Instructor in Horticulture in the 
Cornell University. 


In these days this subject is conceded to be of 
especial importance to the horticulturist; for it is 
only by intelligent spraying that many large fruit 
interests are saved from utter extinction. Professor 
Lodeman treats the subject both historically and 
practically, and the work forms the only complete 
manual of spraying, being admittedly the standard 
authority. Not only is spraying discussed in its 
relations to the plant or tree and the crop, but the 
diseases and insects which are to be combatted are 
most fully presented. 

The SprAtimg of Plants Includes in its first part a complete 
history of the rise of spraying, both in this country and abroad. 
There are also full illustrated accounts of pumps and nozzles, com- 
plete recipes of formulas, and the like. The second part, compris- 
ing 135 pages, entitled "Specific Directions for Spraying Cultivated 
Plants, ** is an alphabetical illustrated account of the various insects 
and fungi, with methods of treating them. 

"Mr. Lodeman has gathered the results of an immense amount of 
experiments, both in Europe and America, and his book can be trusted not 
only as a manual of practice, but as a true and well classified reeord of our 
knowledce on this subject at the present tlme.^'^Oarden tmd Forest, 

"There is nothing else on the subject so new, complete, accurate and 
available. "-i?p<min(y Pott (N.Y.). 




GROWING. By L. H. BAILEY, Professor of 
Horticulture in the Cornell University. 


There have been manuals and treatises on fruit- 
growing, but this volume is the first consistent 
presentation of the underlying principles affecting 
the growth of the various fruits. It is thus unique, 
and it occupies a field of the greatest importance. 
It joins science and practice, for it not only discusses 
the reasons for certain operations, but presents the 
most approved methods, gathered from the successful 
fruit-growers of America. It appeals especially to 
the horticulturist who is willing to have his brain 
direct and supplement the work of his hands, and to 
acquire a knowledge of principles rather than a mere 
memorandum of their application. 

The Principles of Fruit-Growinq includes: Introductory 
Discussion y comprising an inventory and classification of fruits, the 
fruit zones, the outlook for fruit-growing; the Location and its 
Climate, with a full discussion of frosts; the Tilling of Fruit 
Lands; the Fertilizing of Fruit Lands; the Planting of Orchards; 
Secondary Care of Orchards ; Diseases, Insects and Spraying ; 
Picking and Packing and Storing Fruits, Shipping, etc.; and a 
bibliography of American writings on the subject. 

^The book is very practical in its troatment of the subject of frult- 
growins, after a brief introductory entering at once into the discussion of 
the location of the orchard. foUowine that with the tillage of fruit lands, 
dealing with the planting and care of fruits. Taken all in all, it is the most 
complete book on fruit-growing at a small price we have seen.'' — Western 



Comprises practical hand-books for the horticultur- 
ist, explaining and illustrating in detail the various 
important methods which experience has demon- 
strated to be the most satisfactory'. They may be 
called manuals of practice, and though all are pre- 
pared by Professor Bailey, of Cornell University, 
they include the opinions and methods of success- 
ful specialists in many lines, thus combining the 
results of the observations and experiences of nu- 
merous students in this and other lands. Thev are 
written in the clear, strong, concise English and in 
the entertaining style which characterize the author. 
The volumes are compact, uniform in style, clearly 
printed, and illustrated as the subject demands. 
They are of convenient shape for the pocket, and 
are substantially bound in flexible green cloth. 

THE HORTICULTURIST'S RULE BOOK. By L. H. Baii^st. Fourth edi- 
tion. 312 pp. 75 cts. 

THE NURSERY- BOOK. By L. H. Bailkt. Third edition. 365 pp. tl. 

PLANT-BREEDING. By L. H. Bailet. 293 pp. $1. 

THE FORCING-BOOK. By L. H. Bailet. 280 pp. $1. 

GARDEN-MAKING. By L. H. Bailet. Second edition. 425 pp. $1. 

THE PRUNING-BOOK. By L. H. Bailet. 540 pp. $1.50. 



THE SURVIVAL OF THE UNLIKE. Second edition. 515 pp. |2. 

LESSONS WITH PLANTS. 523 pp. $1.10 net. 

FIRST LESSONS WITH PLANTS. 127 pp. 40 cts. net. 



LANT-BREEDING: Being Five Lectures 
upon the Amelioration of Domestic Plants. 

By L. H. BAILEY, Professor of Horticulture in the 
Cornell University. 


A work of unique interest, it being the only 
volume upon this subject. ** When one considers the 
marvelous changes in our fruits, vegetables and 
flowers within a generation through the work of 
man, in turning to his purposes the impulses of 
nature, the great interest of this book may be indi- 
cated. It tells how varieties of cultivated plants 
come about, and further, how one may engage in 
the fascinating work of originating them. The 
grower who gropes in the dark in his search for 
the ideal fruit or flower may here find guidance and 
aid in the principles governing the work. 

Plant-Breedinq comprises five chapters: The Fact and 
Philosophy of Variation; The Philosophy of the Crossing of Plants; 
How Domestic Varieties Originate; Borrowed Opinions, being trans- 
lations from the writings of Verlot, Carri^e and Focke; Pollination, 
or How to Cross Plants. Chapter HI. contains the list of fifteen 
rules for plant-breeding which De Varigny, the eminent French 
writer, has called *^the quindecalogue of the horticulturist.** 

** Professor Bailey's elneidAtlon of the matter will be found clear, simple, 
direct, as far as possible untechnleal, and so written as to make a pleasant 
appeal to every intelligent reader, even though not deeply versed or very 
specially interested in botanical 8eienee."-*-CourU7y Oentleman, 

*^The author has here collected and brought together a good deal of in- 
formation about the origination of new forms of plants not otherwise easily 
obtainable, and thereby renders no small service to horticulturists in search 
of such knowledge.**— ^meriean Agriculturist,